3 ms·
And yet we still call intellectual "property" just that, "intellectual property" even though it's not a property for most of the laws except for the ones writte
by Joker_vD 5y ago
And yet we still call intellectual "property" just that, "intellectual property" even though it's not a property for most of the laws except for the ones written to specifically deal with intellectual "property". The wonderful world of law.
- igravious 5y agoVery good point.
- koheripbal 5y agoThere's no "master" set of definitions in law. Every law has its own definitions. So contrary definitions are irrelevant.
- matwood 5y agoGreat point. Go look at any substantial legal agreement and there is normally a bunch of definitions at the top or in an amendment.
- roenxi 5y agoWell ... irrelevant in the technical execution of the justice system. In practice it makes the laws easier to follow if people use the same words for the same concepts and tests. If property means physical stuff in one law and thought in another it may become confusing to work out how to follow the law.
- vulcan01 5y agoProperty, in law, practically always means "something someone owns". Intellectual property is something someone owns, just as a house is. I'm not sure there are conflicting definitions in the law.