In civil law jurisdictions, intellectual property has frequently been called intellectual rights, usually a somewhat larger idea that included moral rights and other personal protections that can not be bought or sold. Use of the term intellectual rights has fell since the early 1980s, as use of the term intellectual property increased.
Alternative terms monopolies on info and intellectual monopoly emerged among those who argue against the "property" or "intellect" or "rights" assumptions, notably Richard Stallman. The backronyms intellectual protectionism and intellectual poverty, whose initials are IP, have found supporters also, particularly among those who used the backronym digital limitations management.
The argument that an intellectual property right trends
should in the interests of better complementary of relevant private and public interests be termed an intellectual monopoly opportunity IMP was advanced by some number of academics as well as Birgitte Andersen and Thomas Alured Faunce.
The free culture motion champions the production of content that bears little or no limitations.
Some critics of intellectual property, like those in the free culture motion, point at intellectual monopolies as harming health in the case of pharmaceutical patents , preventing progress, and benefiting concentrated interests to the detriment of the masses, and argue that the public interest is harmed by ever expansive monopolies in the form of extensions, software patents, and business technique patents. More recently scientists and engineers are expressing concern that patent thickets are undermining technological development in high tech fields like nanotechnology.
Petra Moser asserted that historical analysis suggests that intellectual property laws may harm innovation.