Re: microsoft vs opensource

[cothrige <cothrige@bellsouth.net>]

Miles Fidelman <mfidelman@meetinghouse.net> writes:
> Tzafrir Cohen wrote:
>> I know about copyrights laws. I know about patent laws. I know about
>> trademarks. I know about property laws. I know of contract laws. I
>> am not aware of any  intelectual property laws.
>>   
> "intellectual property law" = patent law + copyright law + trademark
> law + some related fields
>
> These days you see a lot of law firms describe themselves as
> "intellectual property practices"

I do think the term "intellectual property" is commonly used to describe
a large array of legal concepts, but it isn't, AFAIK, a legal term
applying to specific laws.  There is copyright law, contract law, patent
law, trademark law, and so on, but they are not one and the same and
they do not operate together in some manner.  Some have also made some
rather convincing arguments, IMO, that these legal concepts above are
really too disparate to be clumped together with such an umbrella term
at all.  So, for these reasons, I think it is entirely honest and
correct to say that there are no "intellectual property" laws, and also
to describe the use of that term as "confusing" as the earlier post did.

Patrick