马克思的“领有规律转变理论”，最早出现于《大纲》中，而在《资本论》第一卷中被公诸于世。其核心要义在于：基于自我劳动取得所有的规律转变为基于他人劳动取得所有的规律。马克思的这一理论是为了揭露资本主义正义原则的虚伪性。为了与前现代社会相对抗，打破血缘、政治特权、神权等对财产的垄断，资本主义社会建立了自己的正义原则——劳动所有权。这一原则主要体现为：政治领域中洛克的劳动财产权，经济领域中斯密的劳动价值论与哲学领域中黑格尔的人格所有权，它们共同的理论前提是——独立的个体和建立在自我劳动基础上的所有权。但是，在资本主义的实际运行中，劳动所有权原则却遭到了背离，变成了“劳动=创造他人的所有权”。 针对这一现象，马克思从逻辑和历史两个维度进行批判。从逻辑维度看，马克思暂且承认资本主义理论前提，但通过“资本的两次循环理论”，揭示了“剩余资本I”与劳动力相交换的本质——用他人的劳动成果去交换他人的劳动，从而导致劳动所有权被彻底否定。从历史维度看，首先孤立个人只是18世纪以来市民社会的产物，而非处于斯密等人的自然状态中；其次，关于资本原始积累是否源于自我劳动的积累，《大纲》和《资本论》对此问题的阐释存在较大差异：前者的关注点在于承认资本原始积累干净的可能性，但批判那种试图用“干净的第一桶金”来证明资本主义正义性的企图；后者的关注点在于“第一桶金”本身的暴力性、血腥性，强调其本身就不符合劳动所有权原则。 马克思认为，相较于加剧自然不平等的劳动所有权原则，建立在发达的机器体系和这一物质条件被工人联合占有的基础上的未来社会，应该遵循更符合人类正义的需要所有权原则。

Marx’s inversion of the law of appropriation was first mentioned in Grundrisse , and was posited as a key concept in the first volume of Capital. Its significance is transfer the law of appropriation based on self-labor into the law of appropriation based on others' labor. The object of his theory of Marx is reveal the hypocrisy of the principle of capitalist justice. In order to against the pre-modern society, to overthrow the monopolization of property by social relation such as kinship, political privileges, theocracy, capitalist society established its own principle of justice--the ownership of labor. This principle is mainly embodied firstly, in the political domain, Locke's property rights of labor, secondly, in the economic domain, Smith's theory of value of labor and, lastly, in the philosophical domain, Hegel's personality ownership. Their common theoretical premises are independent individuals and self-labor accumulation. However, in the actual operation of capitalism, this principle of labor ownership has been deviated, and superseded by the "labor = the creating of the ownership of others". In response to this phenomenon, Marx carried out his critique from two dimensions - logic and history. For the logical dimension, Marx justified the premise of capitalism in the beginning, but, through the theory of the two cycles of capital, he revealed the essence of the exchange between surplus capital I and labor force - to exchange others' labor by the work of others, which leads to the absolutely negation of right of labor ownership. For the historical dimension, firstly, the isolated individuals are only the products of civil society since the 18th century, but not something in the natural state coined by Smith; secondly, concerning the original accumulation stemmed from the accumulation of self-labor, there is a big difference between the elaboration of Grundrisse and Capital. The focus of the former is to recognize the possibility of "innocence" of primitive accumulation of capital, but the same time criticize the attempt to justify the justice of capitalism by “the first pot of gold is clean”; the latter emphasizes on the first pot of gold of capital's violence, bloodiness and betrayal of the principle of labor ownership. Marx believed that, compared with the principle of labor ownership which aggravate the natural inequality, based on the developed machinary system and the co-possession of this material base by workers, the future society should follow the principle of ownership of need which much more meets the demands of human justice.