Term "intellectual property" used in PeerTube 2.3

[mdimjasevic]

What happened?

I was reading the PeerTube 2.3 release notes and noticed that in the section on video reporting PeerTube offers an option to report due to a "intellectual property" violation.

What do you expect to happen instead?

Given that PeerTube uses the term "free software" and not some other more popular terms to talk about software freedom, i.e., given that it pays attention to terminology, I would expect it not to use the term "intellectual property". Instead, given that a video is not a physical object, I would expect some other term to be used. A detailed explanation why the term is problematic can be found at https://www.gnu.org/philosophy/not-ipr.en.html.

Steps to reproduce:

1. Visit https://joinpeertube.org/en_US/news#release-2-3-0

2. Scroll down to the section "New features on content moderation".

3. Notice the term in a screenshot.

[rigelk]

What alternative are you suggesting? I'd go for intellectual monopoly.

[yvie-k]

I think a big part of report reasons would be copyright infringement.

But copyright infringement is not "intellectual property".

Intellectual property contains a lot of laws, like patent law or trademark law, which do not fit here. Maybe trademark law could be a reason if the video contains unlawful uses of brand icons, but it's hard to search for other applications here.

On the other hand it does not cover every law that is applicable. For example, Germany prohibits "Nazi symbolism" in non-educational media, which doesn't fit that category at all

It should be renamed to something like "Law violation" if it is desired to group every unlawful activity. Otherwise "Copyright infringement" should be enough for most use cases.

[rigelk]

@Dragoncraft89 trademark and copyright are the areas we want to cover here. As an umbrella term, intellectual property is used to cover both.

But I agree, maybe we're stretching already, as 99% of cases are copyright violation reports, and we could simply use that.