ext_361198 (
spaz-own-joo.livejournal.com
) wrote
in
talkpolitics
2010-12-07 08:18 pm (UTC)
Re: Free Press?
That passage clearly deals with "stolen property" of the tangible sort, which is not legally equivalent to stolen secrets.
Yes, there is a colloquial relationship based on the term "intellectual property", but that relationship is informal, not legally substantive.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dowling_v._United_States_(1985)
(
110 comments
)
Post a comment in response:
From:
Anonymous
This account has disabled anonymous posting.
OpenID
(will be screened if not validated)
Identity URL:
Log in?
Dreamwidth account
Account name
Password
Log in?
If you don't have an account you can
create one now
.
Subject
HTML doesn't work in the subject.
Formatting type
Casual HTML
Markdown
Raw HTML
Rich Text Editor
Message
[
Home
|
Post Entry
|
Log in
|
Search
|
Browse Options
|
Site Map
]
Re: Free Press?
Yes, there is a colloquial relationship based on the term "intellectual property", but that relationship is informal, not legally substantive.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dowling_v._United_States_(1985)