If the men did not have opposed interests, would stop being right the order jurdico." 14 In another one of its brilliant 15 works the author reasons this way: " I am sure that in the mind of my listeners the right word provokes the idea of Law; even, the one of that set of laws that are called codes. It is an empirical definition, but provisionally we can accept it: A set of laws that regulate the conduct of the men ". FRANCOIS GENY it says that the Right is " set of the rules, which the outer conduct of the man is put under, in its relations with its resemblances, and that, under the inspiration of the natural idea of justice, in a state of brings back to consciousness collective of the humanity, appear susceptible of a social sanction, in case of coercive necessity, they are or they tend to be provided of that sanction and from now on they are put under the categorical mandate form dominating the particular wills to assure the order in sociedad". Straight he is " the set of coercible norms that govern the coexistence social" , it considered ABELARDO TOWER. The GEORGES RENARD, mentioned by Pacheco, express that " the positive right is a perpetual one to happen: the order tends towards the perfection without never pausing. The natural right is the direction of this happening; a movement is defined by the aim to that it tends. Then, the positive right, that is to say, the order, must be defined by natural, that is to say justicia". ROSMINI deduced that the right is " a faculty to do what it pleases to us under the shelter of the law moral" 16. LEON DUGUIT prefers to define the right rule and there its central idea is on the right: " The right rule is a line of conduct that prevails the individuals that live in society, rule whose respect is considered at a certain time, by a social group, as the guarantee of the common interest and whose violation brings the collective reaction against the author of violacin" 17.