The "intellectual property" misnomer

[Terry Reedy]

"Tim Peters" <tim.one at comcast.net> wrote in message
news:mailman.1057978117.8939.python-list at python.org...

> [Ben Finney]
> > If the PSF holds the copyright to Python, please say that.
> >
> > If the PSF holds patents which cover Python, please say that.
> >
> > If the PSF owns the trademark for Python, please say that.
> >
> > If the PSF has trade secrets in Python, please say that.
>
> So you somehow managed to divine Guido's intent from that
"ridiculous,
> meaningless term" <0.5 wink> -- part of the PSF's business is indeed
dealing
> with all legalities affecting the use of Python.  I don't think
pedantic
> verbosity makes it any clearer, but may mislead due to omission.

In response to a query of mine, someone -- I believe you, Tim -- said
that CNRI, not PSF, was still attempting to trademark 'Python' as
applied to computer languages (but having some difficulty).  Last I
know, CNRI still has copyrights to Python 1.?-1.6.  So I was a bit
puzzled as to what Guido meant by his blanket statement.

Has CNRI (and the Dutch institute before it) renounced its (their)
'IP' claims with respect to Python in favor of PSF?  If not, then "The
PSF holds the intellectual property rights for Python" would not be
true as commonly interpreted, at least as by this commoner.  (But then
I know that Guido most definitely ain't a lawyer).

Terry J. Reedy



Terry J. Reedy