Talk:Intellectual property
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
 |
This article is within the scope of WikiProject Law, an attempt at providing a comprehensive, standardised, pan-jurisdictional and up-to-date resource for the legal field. | |
| ??? | This article has not yet received a quality rating on the assessment scale. | |
| Top | This article has been assessed as Top-importance on the assessment scale. | |
|
| 1 |
Contents |
[edit] Archiving
I've archived the talk page that was here as it was getting too long, so feel free to bring back and revive any discussion that was ongoing Philbradley 00:23, 22 August 2006 (UTC)
[edit] Cool!
How did you make that little picture for the archives? —The preceding unsigned comment was added by Smith Jones (talk • contribs).
- It's a copy paste of code suggested for archives by Wikipedia:How to archive a talk page. Glad you like it.Philbradley 08:35, 4 September 2006 (UTC)
[edit] Valuation
I removed the following text, as I am unsure whether it is at best slightly inaccurate and maybe evenleaning towards POV (and it's unsourced too):
The creation of a musical composition, invention, valuable software may have cost little, and can generate a very high income. Profit margins from IP are typically much higher than profit margins from manufacturing of tangible goods.
I think that is simplifying the situation too much. Particularly where innovation is concerned, I don't think that you can generally say that the R&D costs are "little". Also, as a patent attorney myself, I know the costs of obtaining patent protection can be pretty steep, especially for your smaller companies. --Harris 10:59, 26 December 2006 (UTC)
[edit] Paul Lerner
I have nominated the article about Paul Lerner for deletion. If you want to participate to the debate, please see Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Paul Lerner. --Edcolins 13:40, 27 January 2007 (UTC)
[edit] The Jewish law line
Jewish law does historically have something to say about "intellectual property" considerations, but the line I found was misleading and missed the point, so I revised it and added a much more useful/appropriate link. —The preceding unsigned comment was added by 132.69.141.238 (talk • contribs).
