X-Sympa-To: patents
Return-Path: <rms@gnu.org>
Delivered-To: patents@aful.org
Received: from fencepost.gnu.org (fencepost.gnu.org [199.232.76.164])
	by stabilite.aful.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 786C044F6B
	for <patents@aful.org>; Mon, 28 Jul 2003 17:38:51 +0200 (CEST)
Received: from rms by fencepost.gnu.org with local (Exim 4.20)
	id 19h9xw-0000Oz-I1; Mon, 28 Jul 2003 11:31:12 -0400
From: Richard Stallman <rms@gnu.org>
To: Hartmut Pilch <phm@a2e.de>
Cc: seth.johnson@RealMeasures.dyndns.org,
	C-FIT_Community@RealMeasures.dyndns.org,
	C-FIT_Release_Community@RealMeasures.dyndns.org,
	fairuse-discuss@nyfairuse.org, DMCA_Discuss@lists.microshaft.org,
	DMCA-Activists@gnu.org, patents@aful.org
In-reply-to: <Pine.LNX.4.44.0307271840330.5050-100000@querty.oas.a2e.de>
	(message from Hartmut Pilch on Sun, 27 Jul 2003 18:48:43 +0200 (CEST))
Subject: Re: [Patents] Washington Times: Internet Patents Divide Industry
Reply-To: rms@gnu.org
References:  <Pine.LNX.4.44.0307271840330.5050-100000@querty.oas.a2e.de>
Message-Id: <E19h9xw-0000Oz-I1@fencepost.gnu.org>
Date: Mon, 28 Jul 2003 11:31:12 -0400
X-Validation-by: rms@gnu.org

    > "Intellectual property" is not property.

    The term could be turned around to be useful.
    E.g. one could say that only an exclusion scope that it is so narrow that
    it is attributable to an individual is "intellectual property".

The term "intellectual property" encourages overgeneralization, which
leads people to choose between a few bad across-the-board alternatives.
There is no way to turn the term around to prevent that problem.
We have to attack it.

