Re: Adobe - Photoshop and their "Subscriptions"

Discussion in 'Digital Photography' started by Paul Ciszek, Jun 5, 2013.

  1. Tony Cooper <> wrote:
    > On Tue, 2 Jul 2013 18:09:41 +0200, Wolfgang Weisselberg
    > <> wrote:


    >>Tony Cooper <> wrote:
    >>> On Fri, 28 Jun 2013 12:52:04 +0200, Wolfgang Weisselberg


    >>>>> OK IP is property that has an owner.


    >>>>My bike has an owner.
    >>>>It surely is property.
    >>>>Is it IP?


    >>> The sentence said "OK intellectual property is property that has an
    >>> owner". Use of the abbreviation, IP, does not change the meaning.


    >>Maybe I misparsed.


    >>I read it as
    >> "Okay, intellectual property is (any) property that has
    >> an owner".
    >>Or as
    >> "Correct; intellectual property is (any) property that
    >> has an owner".
    >>Or as
    >> "(A) correct (type of) intellectual property is (any)
    >> property that has an owner".


    >>The alternative of "intellectual property is (intellectual)
    >>property (that has an owner)" makes no sense, IMHO, there can
    >>be property without an owner. (The same IP can even have an
    >>owner & be restricted and be free-for-all just by changing
    >>jurisdictions.)


    >>What is "OK IP is property that has an owner." supposed to mean?


    > I didn't write that sentence. I forget who did.


    > I read it as "Intellectual property is property that has an owner",
    > but understood it to mean that it is non-physical property (a creation
    > of the mind) of which rights are accorded to the person creating it.


    For a long time the US of A didn't recognize non-US authors'
    copyright. So the same book (an IP) could have rights in, say,
    England and no rights in, say, the USA. (And that doesn't even
    encompass that the person creating the IP, e.g. writing the
    book, may never have had moral and/or commercial rights ---
    signed them away before the IP was created, for example.)

    Additionally, the IP rights in the US are often not the ones
    of the creator. (At least over here you can't sign away your
    moral rights ...)


    > Being somewhat familiar with the concept, I could read that meaning
    > into it without it being stated.


    That definition also makes no sense.

    -Wolfgang
     
    Wolfgang Weisselberg, Jul 4, 2013
    1. Advertising

Want to reply to this thread or ask your own question?

It takes just 2 minutes to sign up (and it's free!). Just click the sign up button to choose a username and then you can ask your own questions on the forum.
Similar Threads
  1. nospam

    Re: Adobe - Photoshop and their "Subscriptions"

    nospam, Jun 4, 2013, in forum: Digital Photography
    Replies:
    0
    Views:
    195
    nospam
    Jun 4, 2013
  2. nospam

    Re: Adobe - Photoshop and their "Subscriptions"

    nospam, Jun 4, 2013, in forum: Digital Photography
    Replies:
    1
    Views:
    221
    luxitman
    Jul 3, 2013
  3. philo 

    Re: Adobe - Photoshop and their "Subscriptions"

    philo , Jun 4, 2013, in forum: Digital Photography
    Replies:
    10
    Views:
    278
    nospam
    Jun 5, 2013
  4. nospam

    Re: Adobe - Photoshop and their "Subscriptions"

    nospam, Jun 4, 2013, in forum: Digital Photography
    Replies:
    10
    Views:
    288
    PeterN
    Jun 7, 2013
  5. PeterN

    Re: Adobe - Photoshop and their "Subscriptions"

    PeterN, Jun 5, 2013, in forum: Digital Photography
    Replies:
    0
    Views:
    201
    PeterN
    Jun 5, 2013
Loading...

Share This Page