[pp.int.general] WIPO DG mentions Pirate Party in speech to Blue Sky conference
maxime.rouquet at partipirate.org
Fri Mar 4 09:43:27 CET 2011
I would have suggested the exact opposite : "intellectual property" is
about intellectual things that were abusively made property of someone
(people, society, country...) in a wide variety of ways.
So I would have proposed "intellectual monopolies".
On 03/04/2011 04:09 AM, Amelia Andersdotter wrote:
> industrial property. it is used as industrial goods.
>> [Apologies if this discussion has already occurred elsewhere on this
>> While I understand the desire to move away from the term "intellectual
>> property" due to the unhelpful emphasis on property, and the suggestion
>> that works covered by it are all of some "intellectual value" (and I
>> cringe every time it is used), having a catch-all phrase is very useful.
>> It strikes me that in order to stop people using it, it isn't sufficient
>> to simply criticise it, but we must replace it with something more
>> appropriate. While "the copyright monopoly" is one suggestion, that only
>> covers copyright, whereas we need something that covers all of this
>> stuff (copyrights, moral rights, database rights, performers' rights,
>> design rights, patents, trade marks, resale rights and so on).
>> My initial thought on this was something along the lines of "Information
>> Rights" - as what all this stuff has in common is that it grants rights
>> to use, or prevent the use of information in some way. However, it
>> appears this term is already being used for Data Protection issues and
>> similar (and the cynic inside me suggests someone has already tried to
>> trademark it somewhere). Of course, data protection laws are in many
>> ways similar to copyrights etc. in that they control how information can
>> be used, copied and so on (in fact I vaguely recall cases where
>> copyright has been used to protect the distribution of databases, rather
>> than some sort of data protection law).
>> Anyway, I would be interested in hearing people's thoughts on what term
>> we *should* be using instead of IP.
>> -Will Tovey
>> [There's an interesting, if technical and UK-centric discussion of the
>> history of the term IP here, covering the age of industrial property
>> (that made a little more sense) - worth a read for anyone interested:
>> https://sites.google.com/site/petergroves81/Home ]
>> On 04/03/2011 00:16, Richard Stallman wrote:
>>> Every discussion we hold shapes our habits of speaking and habits of
>>> thinking. The term "intellectual property" tends to mislead the people
>>> who use it as well as support a particular side of the debate.
>>> However, the reason I mentioned it here was to point out something
>>> that we ought to criticize if we talk about or respond to that speech.
>>> I was not responding to another posting here.
>> Pirate Parties International - General Talk
>> pp.international.general at lists.pirateweb.net
> Pirate Parties International - General Talk
> pp.international.general at lists.pirateweb.net
More information about the pp.international.general