[free-sklyarov] Copyright as a restriction

[Xcott Craver]

On Fri, 24 Aug 2001, Tom wrote:

> that's one thing that's gotta change. right now, we are (mostly) still
> BUYING the stuff. but the push into pay-per-use is strong. maybe it's
> still time to reverse that.

	And language is a big part of it.

	We keep falling into the trap of using the terminology of
	the novus ordo pay-per-use.  Here I was talking about
	"licenses" and didn't even realize it.  And it's hard not to
	use the term "intellectual property," a term that further
	enforces a false notion of ownership.

	Maybe "intellectual property" would be an accurate term
	if used appropriately.  I can see how copyrights and trademarks
	themselves can be considered property, rather than the actual
	material being copyrighted.  People do buy and sell and transfer
	ownership of copyrights and patents.  But, too often people
	refer to books themselves as someone's intellectual property.

							S