[Upd-discuss] Re: [A2k] EFF, PK Drop ACTA Suit -- Anyone to Take Up the Case Now?

[Richard Stallman]

The reason I remind people to think about the term "intellectual
property" is that I believe its confusion gives great help to our
enemies in the long term.  Repeating their propaganda is an own-goal.

However, with ACTA there is a more immediate reason to expose the
confusion in the term "intellectual property"-- because the treaty
uses that term.

(See http://www.keionline.org/blogs/2009/06/15/thoughts-acta-negotiations/)

The drafters of this treaty have been led into confusion by their own
propaganda.  (It was only a matter of time before this happened.)
They have written treaty requirements in terms of "intellectual
property".  This means, in effect, imposing a single policy on
copyrights, patents, and trademarks, trade secrets?, and maybe other
legal issues as well.

The term "intellectual property" leads people to make the mistake of
lumping these laws together, and the treaty negotiators have made this
mistake in the treaty itself.  Since these laws are so different,
forcing one policy on all of them is inevitably absurd.

We need to show legislators that the term "intellectual property" is
incoherent, because that shows ACTA is incoherent.