Neither Intellectual Nor Property

Techdirt's Mike Masnick is writing a series of short articles on topics around intellectual property. His latest focuses on the term itself, exploring the nomenclature people have proposed to describe matter that is neither intellectual nor property. The whole series (starting here) is well worth a read.

Comments

nothing to protect if you never invent anything.

[Anonymous Coward]

all i hear is the whining of stupid people.

Hmmm

[El Lobo]

This (excessively dense and and pretentious) article is just a philosofic one. The man is just theorizing about what "intellectual" is and what "property" is , etc, the same way Karl Marx discussed what "the capital" is or what "the worker class" is not.

The answer to everything is as always very simple. Yes: intellectual property does exist, whatever Stallman or other crazie commies say, what I generate with my brain is MY intellectuall property and thus, I can choose to share it, protect it or commercialize it without Stallman or anyone else calling me a criminal for that.

See? So easy.

Re:For heaven's sake...

[Otter]

property in the layman terms of "it has an owner" as in the "copyright owner" but not "property" in the correct technical sense of the word.

1) I'm not sure who you think determines "in the correct technical sense of the word" for those who aren't Stallman Zombies. For most of us, having an "owner" and being "property" are the same thing. Certainly a copyright or patent is just as much "property" as a bond or a mortgage is.

2) Even if one were to concede 1), the fact remains that the guy holding forth on what is and isn't "intellectual" doesn't even know what "intellectual property" refers to.

Re:valuable intellectual property

[DaveV1.0]

Go for it dumbass. Then, those thousands of people can counter-sue you and they will win.

Now, STFU and go back to your homework.

Re:Tax Intellectual Property

[DaveV1.0]

Assholes like you are the cause of the mess. Perhaps we should tax being an asshole.