<!DOCTYPE html PUBLIC "-//W3C//DTD HTML 4.01 Transitional//EN">
<html>
<head>
<meta content="text/html;charset=ISO-8859-1" http-equiv="Content-Type">
<title></title>
</head>
<body bgcolor="#ffffff" text="#000000">
Reinier Bakels wrote:
<blockquote cite="mid:1708A444F3EC42EB90329E2163FD12E7@RBB2008"
type="cite">The confusion is simple. The term "intellectual property"
is WRONG - as is
recognised by legal scholars. Some even argue it is a deliberate lie.
But "property rights" are something else (Vermögensrechte in German - a
perhaps less confusing concept).<br>
</blockquote>
Sorry I got lost with that. I mean, while I have clear that you defend
to respect the current status of material rights for existing
intellectual works -i.e., not allowing retroactiveness-:<br>
<br>
- do you defend to reduce term & scope of material rights -also, <b>not
considering that intellectual works can be considered in any sense as
properties</b>- for new intellectual works?<br>
- or you defend to respect the current status of material rights for
existing intellectual works, and although dismissing the <i>intellectual
pro...whatever</i> expression -and even reducing their material rights
term-, <b>considering that intellectual works are some kind of property</b>?<br>
<br>
I think it would be quite important to know it, Reinier.<br>
<br>
<br>
Carlos Ayala<br>
( Aiarakoa )<br>
<br>
Partido Pirata National Board's Chairman
</body>
</html>