Today is the World Intellectual Property Day. I think, I don’t need to explain that I’m not against the so-called intellectual property. I also do not agree with Richard Stallman’s controversial statements, but I share his thoughts and views that are included in the article entitled “Did You Say “Intellectual Property”? It’s a Seductive Mirage“. When it comes to trademarks, as a part of the IP domain, let me cite few excerpts from the judgment in Hanover Star Milling Co. v. Metcalf, 240 U.S. 403 (U.S. 1916), PDF file.
In the English courts it often has been said that there is no property whatever in a trade-mark, as such.
(…)
In short, the trade-mark is treated as merely a protection for the good-will, and not the subject of property except in connection with an existing business. The same rule prevails generally in this country, and is recognized in the decisions of this court already cited.
What is more interesting, the Grand Chamber of the European Court of Human Rights ruled on 11 January 2007, in Anheuser-Busch Inc. v. Portugal (no. 73049/01), that a trademark is a property as it is provided for in the article 1 of the Protocol no 1, CETS no. 009 to the Convention for the Protection of Human Rights and Fundamental Freedoms, CETS no. 005.
By the way, a well-known American professor and a great expert on copyright law Jane Ginsburg uses the title Professor of Literary and Artistic Property Law. I’d also like to add that I don’t agree with Stephan Kinsella’s and his arguments put forward in the article entitled “Against Intellectual Property“, PDF file.