The "intellectual property" misnomer

[Aahz]

In article <slrnbguf7g.q1.bignose-hates-spam at rose.localdomain.fake>,
Ben Finney  <bignose-hates-spam at and-zip-does-too.com.au> wrote:
>On Fri, 11 Jul 2003 15:13:43 -0400, Guido van Rossum wrote:
>>
>> The PSF holds the intellectual property rights for Python
>
>Ugh.  Please don't propagate this ridiculous, meaningless term.  It's
>used to refer to a wide range of greatly disparate legal concepts; to
>use it as a single term implies that there's some unifying "intellectual
>property" principle joining them together, which is a falsehood.

What Guido probably should have said was something more like, "The PSF
is the holding organization for intellectual property rights for
Python."  The point being that -- eventually, if not now (due to some
current muddles) -- the PSF will hold any and all intellectual property
rights relevant to Python.

While you've got a valid point, it's unnecessarily clumsy to iterate
over all the different forms of intellectual property every time you
mention them.  The idea is that the PSF functions in a manner similar to
the FSF in protecting all the bits of Python from encroachment.  We
don't know -- and can't know -- all the aspects that will be comprised
under that umbrella, as various corporate interests try to stretch the
idea of intellectual property.
-- 
Aahz (aahz at pythoncraft.com)           <*>         http://www.pythoncraft.com/

"Not everything in life has a clue in front of it...."  --JMS