Subject: Re: The term "intellectual property" considered useful
From: "Stephen J. Turnbull" <turnbull@sk.tsukuba.ac.jp>
Date: Thu, 11 May 2006 18:53:31 +0900

>>>>> "L" == L Jean Camp <L> writes:

    L> Stephen, you are working very very hard to defend your own
    L> lexical laziness.

I wish that were true.

    L> If you mean copyright, say "copyright". If you mean orange say
    L> "orange", not "food".

I don't mean copyright.  I mean "intellectual property".

    L> Mostly, as the term is used on this list, it confuses and not
clarifies.


I will say also that it often deeply confuses non-tech people. IU  is
developing a new IPR policy. The committee decided "software is not an
academic" result but rather some product that anyone who programs
makes, even if it for teaching. They had a very strong  "software is
intellectual property" kind of bent. We are still in the nth hour of
discussion, but have mitigated the possible policy. So I do have a
certain case when intelligent academics with no monetary interest have
been deeply confused by the idea of "intellectual property."

Thanks for your time -

- Jean



-- 
Graduate School of Systems and Information Engineering   University of Tsukuba
http://turnbull.sk.tsukuba.ac.jp/        Tennodai 1-1-1 Tsukuba 305-8573 JAPAN
        Economics of Information Communication and Computation Systems
          Experimental Economics, Microeconomic Theory, Game Theory