[%TAGS (074db819ec% %074db819ec) %]
(074db819ec% IF user.email && action == 'arc' %074db819ec)
(074db819ec% END %074db819ec)
- 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
- Subject: Re: [Patents] Washington Times: Internet Patents Divide Industry
- Date: Wed, 30 Jul 2003 16:33:11 -0400
But "intellectual property" is not such an example. The generalisation
in this term is needed in many contexts. We can not chose whether we want
this concept to exist, we can only chose how to name it.
I have very rarely found a situation where this generalization
(including patents, trademarks and copyrights) is useful for clear
thinking. If there is such a case, I think your proposed term
"exclusion rights" would be a good choice, but we should first
try separating the different issues.
(074db819ec%|loc%074db819ec)Archive powered by(074db819ec%END%074db819ec) MhonArc 2.6.16.
(074db819ec%TAGS [% %]%074db819ec)