[pp.int.general] "Intellectual property"

[Richard Stallman]

    Since patents, copyright, design patents and trademarks can overlap 

I think you're mistaken -- copyrights, ordinary (utility) patents, and
trademarks do not overlap.  They are totally separate laws.  To
encourage people to think clearly about each of them, we should oppose
any idea of generalizing about them.

I don't know much about design patents.  It is possible that they have
something in common with utility patents.  But if they do, they do not
share it with copyrights or trademarks.

    Is there any other terms that maybe should be pushed as a replacement 
    for "intellectual property"?

Replacing the term with another term would not address the problem.
The problem comes from focusing on what little some of these laws have
in common, and distracting attention from what really matters about
them (the specifics).

The way to address this problem is to firmly refuse to generalize
about all these laws, and take care to talk about one law at a time.
If we don't make the mistake of trying to generalize about them
we have no need for a way to do so.