[singleshot_]

Assuming that “property” is always short for “real property” will lead to some interesting errors, as illustrated above.

Proprietary rights are varied. If one kind of property relates to a kind of right that doesn’t apply to another kind of property, that’s not a good reason to decide that one kind is not actually property.

[amiga386]

While property has a number of meanings, including "intrinsic quality of a substance" and "something that can be owned", I think it tends to bring about an image of tangible objects in the listener's head.

I prefer the term "asset" to describe owned intangible things of value, such as rights, licenses, financial instruments, etc.

See also https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Intellectual_property#The_term...

> Criticism of the term intellectual property ranges from discussing its vagueness and abstract overreach to direct contention to the semantic validity of using words like property and rights in fashions that contradict practice and law. Many detractors think this term specially serves the doctrinal agenda of parties opposing reform in the public interest or otherwise abusing related legislations, and that it disallows intelligent discussion about specific and often unrelated aspects of copyright, patents, trademarks, etc

[singleshot_]

It might be useful to stop looking up “property” in dictionaries and encyclopedias, and instead learn what the word means.