Re: [Patents] pooling patents, version 2

[Rik van Riel <riel@conectiva.com.br>]

On Fri, 3 Jan 2003 xdrudis@tinet.org wrote:

> > Agreed, IP is a wrong term.  However, I haven't found an alternative
> > wording yet; maybe it is time we came up with an alternative word
> > that covers patents, copyright and the whole field covered by IP,
> > but that doesn't leave the false suggestion of ownership.
>
> IMHO opinion the problem is not "Property" but "intellectual".
> You may not like the fact that it is treated as property, but
> that does not make it a misnomer, because it is a form of property
> (it is something the law allows to own, sell, license, etc.).

It's a very special kind of property, though.  It is the only
kind of "property" where the private property rights expire
after a certain period of time and the long term ownership
lies with all of mankind.

I think I'll stick to my "intellectual patrimony"

Rik
-- 
Bravely reimplemented by the knights who say "NIH".
http://www.surriel.com/         http://guru.conectiva.com/
Current spamtrap:  <a 
href=mailto:"october@surriel.com";>october@surriel.com</a>