I have found numerous pirated ebooks for free online. Please tell me the benefits of

[ZodWallop]

Originally Posted by barryem

"There's a sucker born every minute"
-- P. T. Barnum

Barry

In all honestly, all those quotes were a lead up to the quote from A Fish Called Wanda

[gmw]

Originally Posted by gmw

I don't know enough law to argue the point "under law", and I can see that mortgages, being contracts, may exist where simple ownership does not apply. However, it is (or was) common enough for mortgages to exist were one side is said to own the mortgage. Thus, under the English language definition of "property", even if not the law, a mortgage can be "the thing owned" - which is all that is required for me to call it "property" in a non-legal sense. [...]

Because it's a Saturday and it's too hot to do anything outside ...

First some definitions from The Free Dictionary's legal-dictionary:

Property = anything that is owned by a person or entity. Property is divided into two types: "real property" which is any interest in land, real estate, growing plants or the improvements on it, and "personal property" (sometimes called "personalty") which is everything else.

Personal Property = Personal property can be divided into two major categories: (1) corporeal personal property, including such items as animals, merchandise, and jewelry; and (2) incorporeal personal property, comprised of such rights as stocks, bonds, Patents, and copyrights.

I do notice that mortgage is not explicitly listed, but "such rights as" shows the list is not considered comprehensive. But let's move on...

Mortgage = A legal document by which the owner (i.e., the buyer) transfers to the lender an interest in real estate to secure the repayment of a debt, evidenced by a mortgage note. [...] a document in which the owner pledges his/her/its title to real property to a lender as security for a loan described in a promissory note.

Asset = Real or Personal Property, whether tangible or intangible, that has financial value and can be used for the payment of its owner's debts.

Instrument = A formal or legal written document; a document in writing, such as a deed, lease, bond, contract, or will. A writing that serves as evidence of an individual's right to collect money, such as a check.

cf. that "right to collect money" with the "rights" of Personal Property.

From my accounting lessons I know that a mortgage is considered an asset of the mortgagee, and I'd also say that a mortgage falls within the asset definition from the legal-dictionary site above (has value, can be used for payment of its owners debts). So the above definitions would seem to suggest that a mortgage is property, even in legal terms.

I am supposing that legal documents and discussions probably avoid using the word property to describe the mortgage because it would get very confusing to refer to the document itself as a property separate to the mortgaged property.

... Then again. I paid so much for the legal advice above, that I'm willing to guarantee this post to the same level

[pdurrant]

Originally Posted by mrpotts

That's ridiculous. I've not mentioned anything about piracy, only searching for a book title.

Ahem.

Originally Posted by mrpotts

But my first obligation is to the finances of my family as opposed to an unknown author without the sense to protect their work.

You may not encourage or condone piracy on MobileRead.


You also may not discuss religious topics outside the P&R forum (Guideline 7), nor should you discuss actions of the moderating team in open forum (Guideline 12).

If you wish to argue further, please take it to PM, with me or any of the other mods.

[Greg Anos]

Originally Posted by gmw

Because it's a Saturday and it's too hot to do anything outside ...

First some definitions from The Free Dictionary's legal-dictionary:

Property = anything that is owned by a person or entity. Property is divided into two types: "real property" which is any interest in land, real estate, growing plants or the improvements on it, and "personal property" (sometimes called "personalty") which is everything else.

Personal Property = Personal property can be divided into two major categories: (1) corporeal personal property, including such items as animals, merchandise, and jewelry; and (2) incorporeal personal property, comprised of such rights as stocks, bonds, Patents, and copyrights.

I do notice that mortgage is not explicitly listed, but "such rights as" shows the list is not considered comprehensive. But let's move on...

Mortgage = A legal document by which the owner (i.e., the buyer) transfers to the lender an interest in real estate to secure the repayment of a debt, evidenced by a mortgage note. [...] a document in which the owner pledges his/her/its title to real property to a lender as security for a loan described in a promissory note.

Asset = Real or Personal Property, whether tangible or intangible, that has financial value and can be used for the payment of its owner's debts.

Instrument = A formal or legal written document; a document in writing, such as a deed, lease, bond, contract, or will. A writing that serves as evidence of an individual's right to collect money, such as a check.

cf. that "right to collect money" with the "rights" of Personal Property.

From my accounting lessons I know that a mortgage is considered an asset of the mortgagee, and I'd also say that a mortgage falls within the asset definition from the legal-dictionary site above (has value, can be used for payment of its owners debts). So the above definitions would seem to suggest that a mortgage is property, even in legal terms.

I am supposing that legal documents and discussions probably avoid using the word property to describe the mortgage because it would get very confusing to refer to the document itself as a property separate to the mortgaged property.

... Then again. I paid so much for the legal advice above, that I'm willing to guarantee this post to the same level

A mortgage is a specific kind of bond. One collateralized with a piece of real estate.

(Today is a travel day for me. I may not sign on for a while. . . )

[Sarmat89]

How is copyright not a property? It is a virtual factory for making books, same as boot or pencil factories are property.

[pwalker8]

Originally Posted by DNSB

Would it make everybody/anybody feel happier if we referred to copyrights as intangible assets or insisted on "intellectual property" as distinct from "real" property?

In today's world, it's hard for anyone to say with a straight face that intangible assets do not have value and are not susceptible to theft as much as any other class of property.

I'm fine with intangible assets. No one ever claimed that copyright can't have value (obvious it depends on the material being copyrighted). Obviously the tangible item, be it a book, painting, whatever, is subject to thief. Stocks and bonds are subject to thief as well, since even though they are referred to as intangible assets, the actual paper they are printed on can be stolen. Violation of Copyright, in and of itself, isn't thief, though it is breaking the law.

OED defines property in the legal context as " the (exclusive) right to the possession, use, or disposal of a thing; ownership, proprietorship." Copyright is not a thing. Elsewhere copyright is compared to a mortgage, but perhaps copyright is better compared to a title such as Duke or Earl. A title is granted by the crown and can be removed by the crown. I would say that the two are a lot closer in meaning and usage than what most consider property. I would also say that a huge driver of the Intellectual Property meme is patents. In the US, the expansion of patents to cover ideas and concepts rather than what had previously limited to tangible devices has exploded the number of patents and is a huge part of various businesses business model. Patents are a much bigger part of the IP model than copyright is.

(just as a note, there is a definition regarding property and copyrighted material. In show business, a play or movie is referred to as a property)

[gmw]

Originally Posted by pwalker8

I'm fine with intangible assets. [...]

You didn't happen to notice the definition for "Asset" given above? I hate to break it to you, but...

The 1925 American dictionary quoted earlier (The New Universities Dictionary) defines "assets" as "the entire property of a trade or company of traders". The OED is similar: "by extension [from effects of a debtor]: All the property of a person or company which may be made liable for his or their debts."

That is, assets is defined in terms of property (it is a subset of property, because not all property has value that can be made liable for debts). To accept that copyright is an asset is to accept it is property.

As for claiming copyright is not a "thing", I suggest you look "thing" up for yourself (since the definition I gave earlier didn't seem to convince you). The definition is pretty much all inclusive.

[barryem]

Originally Posted by ZodWallop

In all honestly, all those quotes were a lead up to the quote from A Fish Called Wanda

Thanks. I think I saw that at one time but I don't remember even what it was about.

Barry

[mrpotts]

A Fish Called Wanda (1988)

In London, four very different people team up to commit armed robbery, then try to doublecross each other for the loot.
Directors: Charles Crichton, John Cleese (uncredited)
Writers: John Cleese (story), Charles Crichton (story) | 1 more credit »
Stars: John Cleese, Jamie Lee Curtis, Kevin Kline |

A great movie that still holds up.

[pwalker8]

Originally Posted by gmw

You didn't happen to notice the definition for "Asset" given above? I hate to break it to you, but...

The 1925 American dictionary quoted earlier (The New Universities Dictionary) defines "assets" as "the entire property of a trade or company of traders". The OED is similar: "by extension [from effects of a debtor]: All the property of a person or company which may be made liable for his or their debts."

That is, assets is defined in terms of property (it is a subset of property, because not all property has value that can be made liable for debts). To accept that copyright is an asset is to accept it is property.

As for claiming copyright is not a "thing", I suggest you look "thing" up for yourself (since the definition I gave earlier didn't seem to convince you). The definition is pretty much all inclusive.

You are just trying to play internet gotcha games right now and totally ignoring my point.

The specific word property is laden with meaning for most people. It's a much more important word than asset in most people's minds. Property is something that I own and can't be taken away from me, asset is something that is of worth. Words as a rhetorical device are important. That is a big reason that, for example, why what blacks in the US prefer to be called has changed a number of times over the years. Negro, Afro-american, Black, African-american, all mean the same thing but the underlying emotional context and the subconscious assumptions behind the word is different.

[DiapDealer]

Originally Posted by pwalker8

You are just trying to play internet gotcha games right now and totally ignoring my point.

And you're just making up definitions that work for how you wish to think about things.

Originally Posted by pwalker8

The specific word property is laden with meaning for most people. It's a much more important word than asset in most people's minds.

Source? Are you sure you don't mean "your mind?" I can assure you it holds no extra-special meaning for me, other than what most dictionaries claim it means.

Originally Posted by pwalker8

Property is something that I own and can't be taken away from me, asset is something that is of worth.

Again ... the source of those definitions? Or are those simply your own constructs? How are "properties" you own any more exempt from being taken away from you than "assets" you might own?

[gmw]

Originally Posted by pwalker8

You are just trying to play internet gotcha games right now and totally ignoring my point.

The specific word property is laden with meaning for most people. It's a much more important word than asset in most people's minds. Property is something that I own and can't be taken away from me, asset is something that is of worth. Words as a rhetorical device are important. That is a big reason that, for example, why what blacks in the US prefer to be called has changed a number of times over the years. Negro, Afro-american, Black, African-american, all mean the same thing but the underlying emotional context and the subconscious assumptions behind the word is different.

"internet gotcha"? When you suggested referring to pre-1970s dictionaries (because you claimed that "The push to expand the term property to intellectual property didn't really take hold in the US until the 70's"), I pulled down a couple of the old dictionaries I have on the shelf here (genuine paper, not Internet), making sure at least one was an American edition to ensure relevance to yourself. I have genuinely tried to find your point.

The "laden with meaning" thing (we now seem to be talking subjective rather than factual, as you appear to be referring to something that hasn't made it into dictionaries) isn't something I can judge from your perspective, perhaps there are connotations where you live that I am not aware of.

Here in Australia, as far as I can tell, we seem to favour the dictionary definition: if I own something then it's my property, so if I own the copyright on my work then it must be my property. (I don't expect many Australians spend much time thinking about copyright, and may not understand all the details, but if they were told that they own a copyright then the fact of ownership would - I believe - be enough to confer "property" status in their minds.) While the word "property" with no other context would probably be assumed to refer to real estate property, we are quite used to using the word in a broader context. (For example, we would not expect to find real estate in a "Lost Property" cupboard. )

Can you offer any examples as to how this is different where you are?

[Hitch]

Originally Posted by pwalker8

You are just trying to play internet gotcha games right now and totally ignoring my point.

The specific word property is laden with meaning for most people. It's a much more important word than asset in most people's minds. Property is something that I own and can't be taken away from me, asset is something that is of worth. Words as a rhetorical device are important. That is a big reason that, for example, why what blacks in the US prefer to be called has changed a number of times over the years. Negro, Afro-american, Black, African-american, all mean the same thing but the underlying emotional context and the subconscious assumptions behind the word is different.

I hate to kibitz here, but quite bluntly, what "most people think" about the meaning of a word or phrase used in law really means nothing. The man in the street approach to whether John Doe thinks of "copyright" is property, or an asset, or some type of instrument, is moot. Copyright is property, because it is thusly defined at law. Period. It doesn't matter if someone doesn't THINK it is, because their thoughts on the matter have no effect thereupon. Arguing that because Jane doesn't know that copyright is a property makes it okay for Jane to pirate is the old "ignorance of the law" excuse.

Terms at law and legal definitions don't change just because the populace is ignorant. It's not like the language, in which, eventually, if enough people think that "begging the question" means "ask the question," (which it does NOT), the definition will change to mean, "poses the question." Because language is a living thing, that can and does change with popular usage. The law doesn't change in the same way.

I don't care if 10 million people think that copyright isn't property--that doesn't make it NOT property. It's an asset--but it's not an asset that can be repossessed for failure to pay. It's property, even if you can't hold it in your hand. Period.

Hitch

[barryem]

I don't think the populace is ignorant just because common language is different from legal language. The vast majority of people in this world are not lawyers. If legal people have a particular term that has a particular meaning that's just fine. The same is true of technical people.

As a programmer I know the term "routine" means specifically a series of code. I can say routine to any other programmer and he has a good idea what I'm talking about. But if someone, not a programmer, tells me I should modify my daily routine I'm smart enough to know he doesn't mean a block of code.

So maybe you, who seems to have a legal orientation, could try to recognize the context when someone talks about property.

If you want to talk about property in a legal context say you're talking about it in a legal context. If you want to talk about property in a more general way say you're doing that. Otherwise nobody's communicating much of anything.

Barry

[DiapDealer]

And then, of course, there's the tons of people who have no difficulty understanding that copyright can--both legally and generally (by pre-1970s dictionary definitions)--be considered "property." Considering it so doesn't break the world. And it certainly doesn't cause me any conversational grief. *shrug*