Re: [Patents] Washington Times: Internet Patents Divide Industry

[Hartmut Pilch <phm@a2e.de>]

> Another problem with "immaterial property" is that it is even vaguer and
> wider that "interlectual property" - an internet domain name is
> immaterial property,

Indeed that is immaterial property, and it is likely to be classified as
"intellectual property" by some people.

> stocks and shares are immaterial property,

shares are parts of companies with all their material and immaterial
assets.

> most of the time, most of my money is, to me immaterial, as most of what
> goes into and out of my account is done via electronic transfers between
> my account and that of the student loans company, or my landlord, or the
> supermarket, I only use fairly small proportion of it as cash.

Money is an abstraction from property that can be turned into property,
both immaterial and material.

I do agree that "immaterial" is of wider scope than "intellectual".  E.g.
I have no difficulty in calling rights to Boris Becker's face or tennis
game broadcasting privileges "immaterial property".  But the term
"intellectual" may sound strange in this context, although it is in fact
used there.