Talk:Q131257
Autodescription — intellectual property (Q131257)
- Useful links:
- View it! – Images depicting the item on Commons
- Report on constraint conformation of “intellectual property” claims and statements. Constraints report for items data
- Parent classes (classes of items which contain this one item)
- Subclasses (classes which contain special kinds of items of this class)
- ⟨
intellectual property⟩ on wikidata tree visualisation (external tool)(depth=1) - Generic queries for classes
- See also
- This documentation is generated using
{{Item documentation}}.
Subclass of "work"?[edit]
I added: "subclass of" "work (Q386724)" in order to make sure patents were in the category of works, which was needed for them to have publication date. I could believe that was not correct and if so, delete it, and I'll find another way. I think intellectual property is generally thought of as applying to human works only -- inventions, publications, and occasionally discoveries -- and therefore this subclassing would be okay. -- econterms (talk) 02:33, 16 December 2017 (UTC)
- Changed my mind and removed "subclass of" "human work". On reflection, the item for patent (Q253623) is an instance of a human work and of intellectual property, but the legal concept of intellectual property, here, is not an instance of a specific human work. -- econterms (talk) 23:33, 17 December 2017 (UTC)
Erga Omnes[edit]
I have marked as deprecated the statement that said that intellectual property (Q131257) is a subclass of erga omnes (Q332624). Conceptually it makes no sense: intellectual property (Q131257) is a concept that is enforced through law (Q7748), not a specific subset of law (Q7748). Furthermore, this statement causes inconsistencies in the knowledge base. For instance:
- if intellectual property (Q131257) is a subclass of erga omnes (Q332624) which is a subclass of law (Q7748), and
- Coca-Cola (Q2813) is an instance of brand (Q431289) which is a subclass of intellectual property (Q131257), then
- Coca-Cola (Q2813) is an instance of law (Q7748).
I, for one, welcome our new soda overlords :) 2A00:1620:C0:50:F032:5F9D:4E3E:D64A 14:56, 6 November 2018 (UTC)
- Something similar is happening through exclusive right (Q1146011). I've added the class tree template to this page so it can be visualized better. According to this Coca-Cola (Q2813) is a document (Q49848) / media (Q340169) / text (Q234460) / written work (Q47461344) etc. I don't have the domain knowledge to know how best to fix it. --NoInkling (talk) 03:16, 11 March 2019 (UTC)
- From a quick Wikipedia perusal, maybe by removing exclusive right (Q1146011) and making this a subclass (or instance?) of bundle of rights (Q4997551) instead? And then working from there if needed. --NoInkling (talk) 03:26, 11 March 2019 (UTC)
- I've taken the liberty of deprecating exclusive right (Q1146011) and adding bundle of rights (Q4997551) of (P642) exclusive right (Q1146011) instead. --NoInkling (talk) 23:10, 14 March 2019 (UTC)