Development of Creative Commons licenses

["J.B. Nicholson-Owens" <jbn AT forestfield.org>]

Steven Ericsson-Zenith wrote:
> An open source license also licenses the use of intellectual property
> - not only the copyright of the source. Copyright pertains only to
> the substantive document it is applied to - not the intellectaul
> property within. Or am I mistaken ?

I think you are mistaken, but more on the use of a concept that has no 
meaning.  "Intellectual property" is not a real subject, thus no 
substantive questions can be asked about it and one cannot answer the 
question you have asked except to point out that the question makes no 
sense.

Copyright law, patent law, trademark law, mask rights, and other 
disparate areas of law, which are often mashed together as "intellectual 
property" as though they have so much in common, are real and can be 
discussed.