Before introducing the criticism of intellectual property, we should again define the meaning of intellectual property. The term "intellectual property" is problematically elastic. While it can be viewed from at least five different perspectives (Gollin, 2007), in this article, we'll consider three different ones: dictionary, law, and scholars.

According to the definition of the World Intellectual Property Organization (WIPO), intellectual property now applies to creations of mind or invention, literary and artistic works, symbols, names, images, and designs used in commerce. Legally, intellectual property includes patents, trade secrets, trademarks, and copyright. Finally, scholars prefer an even broader view of intellectual property.  Scholars, prefer a definition that includes individual creativity and socially adopted innovations, as well as collective knowledge (Gollin, 2007).

Since there are various definitions of intellectual property from varied perspectives, the notion is vulnerable to the most obvious criticism: IP is easily misunderstood.  A common second argument made about intellectual property is that the very nature of the property presents a challenge. Intellectual property usually refers to something intangible: information, ideas. Therefore, it is difficult to tell when such property has been misappropriated.