Reader Comments (rss)

(Flattened / Threaded)

1.  

   BB

   

   Someone, Nov 21st, 2006 @ 4:08pm

   
   

   I've always though that intelectual propertly sounded a little thought policey.

   [ reply to this | link to this | view in thread ]

2.  

   Intellectual Monopolies

   

   Joe Smith, Nov 21st, 2006 @ 4:39pm

   
   

   Your point is well taken. How different would the debate about patents be if they were referred to as "intellectual monopolies" rather than "intellectual property"?

   [ reply to this | link to this | view in thread ]

3.  

   if someone hacks a government server

   

   nonuser, Nov 21st, 2006 @ 5:19pm

   
   

   swipes a bunch of client account information, and sells it to some organized crime outfit overseas, is that stealing or merely infringement? What if that crime outfit uses the data to obtain credit cards in the clients' names, and runs up substantial bills? Is there a loss of tangible property, or is this merely updating bits on some hard drives in server farms?

   [ reply to this | link to this | view in thread ]

4.  

   

   Stu, Nov 21st, 2006 @ 5:44pm

   
   

   Atwood, Bradbury, Huxley and Orwell all saw the distortion of human language as the first step towards the obliteration of freedom and the beginning of fascism.
   
   Language, like knowledge, is power; who controls language controls the masses.

   [ reply to this | link to this | view in thread ]

5.  

   Re: if someone hacks a government server

   

   Anonymous Coward, Nov 21st, 2006 @ 6:23pm

   
   

   If someone has credit card numbers in their possession, that's not illegal. What's illegal is using that information to make purchases on someone else's account without their permission.
   
   To confuse intellectual property infringement with credit fraud is completely braindead. Should I we convict Amazon.com of credit fraud because they store credit information?
   
   Go hide under a bridge, troll

   [ reply to this | link to this | view in thread ]

6.  

   I can remember when...

   

   Bri, Nov 21st, 2006 @ 6:37pm

   
   

   I can remember when being a 'hacker' was a good thing. Your mission in life was tweaking the hardware and software for maximum efficiency, something I still do today. The press misappropriated it and changed it into something evil, system cracking and theft. Language drifts over time as anyone of any significant age realizes.

   [ reply to this | link to this | view in thread ]

7.  

   

   Anonymous Coward, Nov 21st, 2006 @ 8:29pm

   
   

   Richard Stallman wrote about this very point a couple of years ago (http://www.gnu.org/philosophy/not-ipr.xhtml).

   [ reply to this | link to this | view in thread ]

8.  

   Intellectual Wealth

   

   Anonymous Coward, Nov 21st, 2006 @ 8:48pm

   
   

   Ignoring the issue of overgeneralization, FSF Europe has the interesting idea of using the term Intellectual Wealth, rather than intellectual property in political discussions. The idea being that a government committee devoted to 'intellectual property' is going to be focussed on granting and protecting ownership-like rights. A committee devoted to 'intellectual wealth' may (hopefully) be more focussed on the production and distribution of knowledge - Monopoly privileges being one of may tools to acomplish that end.

   [ reply to this | link to this | view in thread ]

9.  

   Re: Intellectual Wealth

   

   Anonymous Coward, Nov 21st, 2006 @ 8:59pm

   
   

   "Monopoly privileges being one of may tools to acomplish that end."
   
   Sorry for the typo:
   
   Monopoly privileges being one of many tools to acomplish that end.

   [ reply to this | link to this | view in thread ]

10.  

    "intellectual property" is really just thought: em

    

    Anonymous Coward, Nov 21st, 2006 @ 10:12pm

    
    

    but the legislators knew the public would not vote for the FBI to be "thought police", hence the name change.
    
    Now I just need to get my little town to use its new eminent domain powers to confiscate the intellectual property rights for Microsoft for the benefit of the town's citizens.
    
    when that happens, maybe more people will vote Libertarian.

    [ reply to this | link to this | view in thread ]

11.  

    Here's an idea...

    

    YouKnowNothing, Nov 22nd, 2006 @ 6:06am

    
    

    If the RIAA, MPAA, BSA, et. al. like to pretend that intellectual property is the same as real, tangible property, how about instituting a property tax for it? You'd think the government would be all for this incredible source of tax revenue, and all of a sudden the RIAA, MPAA, etc., would be crying and screaming that intellectual property isn't the same thing a real, tangible propery.
    
    Man, that would be great to see.

    [ reply to this | link to this | view in thread ]

12.  

    Re: Re: if someone hacks a government server

    

    Anonymous Coward, Nov 22nd, 2006 @ 6:21am

    
    

    No it's a valid point....it is just numbers and bits of data changing hands.
    
    I should point out that this is not so different than all the bitching that users should lock their machines down. Vendors who are not properly authenticating sales are 90% of the problem.

    [ reply to this | link to this | view in thread ]

13.  

    I've said it before and I'll say it again...

    

    Wizard Prang, Nov 22nd, 2006 @ 7:01am

    
    

    "Intellectual Property" is an Oxymoron
    
    http://wizardprang.wordpress.com/2006/09/28/a-hitch-hikers-guide-to-copyright/

    [ reply to this | link to this | view in thread ]

14.  

    Re: words

    

    mousepaw, Nov 22nd, 2006 @ 7:03am

    
    

    Stu: profound.
    
    Wording is extremely important. How a person uses a word can have a lot of power. Here's an example: don't ask a man if he "can" do something, ask him if he "would." Conversely, ask a woman if she "can" as opposed to "would" and you'll get a better response. I still think that "hacker" is a good word because, to me, it still means a person with above average knowledge of computer systems.
    
    There was a greek fellow who recognized the power of words. It was his passion and life's work. Unfortunately, I can't remember his name (Sophocles?) but he became an extremely persuasive fellow. He chose his words very carefully. I believe this was one of the writers L Ron Hubbard studied before he wrote "Dianetics."
    
    Getting back to the point: while we are (as a society) seemingly going through a "dumbing-down" process, anyone in any position of power (including lawyers) knows that if something is worded correctly they are able sway results in their favor.

    [ reply to this | link to this | view in thread ]

15.  

    

    Joe C Brown, Nov 22nd, 2006 @ 7:19am

    
    

    "the law itself treats these rights differently than those involving physical property. To give three examples from US law, copyright infringement is not punishable by laws against theft or trespass, but rather by an entirely different set of laws with different penalties. Patent infringement is not a criminal offense although it may subject the infringer to civil liability. Willfully possessing stolen physical goods is a criminal offense while mere possessing of goods which infringe on copyright is not. Furthermore, in the United States physical property laws are generally part of state law, while copyright law is in the main measure federal."

    - JB - Optimization Consulting

    [ reply to this | link to this | view in thread ]

16.  

    "Intellectual property"

    

    CodeWarrior, Nov 22nd, 2006 @ 8:15am

    
    

    I agree wholehearedly with Tim Lee, and in my blogs and writings, have advocated use of the term "intangible property" or "virtual property" to indicate the non-tangible nature of copyrighted materials.

    [ reply to this | link to this | view in thread ]

17.  

    Renaming "intellectual property"

    

    CodeWarrior, Nov 22nd, 2006 @ 8:17am

    
    

    See this link http://www.boycott-riaa.com/article/16630

    [ reply to this | link to this | view in thread ]

18.  

    Hey Mike, I Found You A Roomie

    

    Billy The Blogging Poet, Nov 22nd, 2006 @ 11:13am

    
    

    Intellectual Property is property just like real estate or your grandmother's car-- steal it (or infringe upon it) and you can get in trouble. While some lawyer types will argue that IP isn't the same as real property their argument is simply semantics-- even the lawyers at Techdirt.com. There are some differences between tangible property and Intellectual Property with "Fair Use" being the most common but Intellectual Property can be bought, sold, traded, and destroyed just as your grandmother's car so for the sake of argument tell the lawyers at Techdirt.com to shove it up their... Well, you know where it goes. Besides, for the lawyer types out there, examples of fair use of private property exist as well. If you don't believe me then make you way over to the local mall and try to find out whose permission you need before you can enter the mall. Careful, the security guards might call the guys with butterfly nets and white jackets to fetch you home.
    
    Intellectual Property isn't real property-- give me a break. No one taxes my arm and every lawyer in the world would back away from trying to prove that my arm doesn't belong to me.
    
    Tell Mikie the new tenants will be moving in his office Monday morning...

    [ reply to this | link to this | view in thread ]

19.  

    Re: Hey Mike, I Found You A Roomie

    

    Jim of Yorkshire, Nov 22nd, 2006 @ 3:43pm

    
    

    Actually there IS a very, very significant difference between tangible physical property and so-called "intellectual property": alienation. Alienation is the term that describes what happens when a person sells the property. If I sell my car, I alienate myself from the car -- I can no longer legally use the car. I can however sell you my "intellectual property" without alienating myself from the "intellectual property". Just because I tell you my idea in return for a payment doesn't mean that I instantly forget the idea and can't re-think it.
    
    Any way you cut it, so called "intellectual property" is ONLY considered property because a few laws say it is so. Those laws, btw, are pretty recent developments in human history - perhaps last 200 years at most (maybe 300 considering Statue of Anne). In contrast, physical property has been universally recognized since before recorded history began.

    [ reply to this | link to this | view in thread ]

Add Your Comment