> the concept of property is not limited to physical objects Why not? The word property implies possession. So I ask, what should be considered property? > ce

> the concept of property is not limited to physical objects Why not? The word property implies possession. So I ask, what should be considered property? > certain assignable contractual rights are property, but are intangible, infinitely reproducible I wouldn't argue that contractual rights should be considered property -- but I find it somewhat irrelevant considering it has no bearing on anyone outside of said agreement. Two people making a voluntary agreement is not the same as a chef demanding nation-wide royalties for copying his dish.