Labour, is it a “thing” in the juridical sense?

Abstract

Labour, is it a “thing” in the juridical sense? An answer to this question has been given in the affirmative recently. This is largely an error, as it entails a confusion of juridical categories and a failure to distinguish between distinct notions. Such a view, moreover, represents an unnecessary break with established views on how to define “things”. Interestingly, this reduction of labour to the status of a tradable thing is connected to a turn towards the “immaterial" in the thought of some jurists, who are beginning to conflate notions such as “goods”, “patrimonial rights” and “incorporeal things”.