"Jim Henderson" <nos### [at] nospamcom> wrote in message
news:4a0c391a$1@news.povray.org...
> On Wed, 13 May 2009 14:52:38 -0600, somebody wrote:

> >> IOW, it's not property, it's a right.

> > Why the term "intellectual property"?

> Marketing + Lawyering = occasionally stupid terminology

I don't think it's stupid at all, unless you consider "ownership" as a whole
stupid. You do own the copyright (or patent or trademark... etc ), whichever
way you look at it, so it's natural to speak of those things as "property".

"Property" vs "right" is a false dichotomy - they are not in the same class:
Ownership *is* a right, property is something that you own. Sure, one can
easily imagine utopic (or tribal) societies where private ownership doesn't
exist as a right at all. But in most modern societies, it exists as such
(though not unlimited, i.e. there are certain things, material or
immaterial, that you cannot own). When you violate that right of an owner,
it's theft. The rest is splitting hairs, and existance of other narrower
terminology (i.e. software piracy) doesn't mean it's not theft. Otherwise,
someone else can argue that carjacking is not theft either.

Post a reply to this message