View Single Post
Texrat's Avatar
Posts: 11,700 | Thanked: 10,045 times | Joined on Jun 2006 @ North Texas, USA
#87
Originally Posted by dmj726 View Post
There are astonishingly few cases where one needs to discuss patents, copyrights, and trademarks as a single thing. They are more dissimilar than similar. IP is like discussing how to regulate birds and airplanes under the term "air traffic." Sure they both fly, but one would hardly want a uniform legal system for both birds and airplanes. (Should we fine birds for not getting proper pilot's licenses? Or should it be the responsibility of the municipality or the local birdwatcher association to get licenses for the birds to fly?) None of these questions make any sense unless you're thinking of both birds and planes as "air traffic". Patents !~ copyrights !~ trademarks.
I disagree with the statement and the analogy (that's a real reach). I think they are more similar than they are different in purpose, which is where they tend to be abstracted and aggregated as "intellectual property".

And again, the term property really is valid despite whatever heartburn it may cause. Contrary to common opinion, patents, trademarks and copyrights do not protect ideas but rather renderings of ideas. This is not something ethereal. You will not usually be granted protection under any of the three unless you have something tangible or a very solid case for something tangible.

There are of course stupid exceptions like business process patents (eg, Amazon one-click) which I think we can all agree should be abolished. Same for these absurdly long protection periods that are counter to the original purpose.
__________________
Nokia Developer Champion
Different <> Wrong | Listen - Judgment = Progress | People + Trust = Success
My personal site: http://texrat.net
 

The Following User Says Thank You to Texrat For This Useful Post: