Browns v Country Club

The Browns owned a home adjacent to a country club golf course. They sued the country club, claiming that the golf balls hit onto their property created a nuisance. The country club countered that there was an easement allowing members to enter the Browns' property to retrieve errant golf balls. The country club produced a set of deed restrictions that had been recorded by the developer of the property before the Browns purchased theirhome. The deed restrictions stated that all owners of the subdivision "shall extend to golfers the courtesy of allowing such person the privilege of retrieving errant golf balls that land on any lot." The deed to the Browns provided that the conveyance was subject to the deed restrictions. The Browns argue that the language in the deed restrictions constitutes a license, rather than an easement.

Question $15(4$ points$)$

Why is it to the Browns' advantage that the language constitutes a license, rather than an easement?

Because a license is a privilege which can be revoked.

Because the holder of a license must pay an annual fee to continue to use it$.$

Because a license is an interest in property that that is not subject to the will of the possessor of the land.