[Upd-discuss] software/intellectual property, portraits and hollywood

[Richard Stallman]

    Does anyone else spot any pattern above?

The pattern is real, but associating it with the concept of
"intellectual property" is an error.

Copyright law (one of the laws that some people label as "intellectual
property") is relevant in your instances 1 and 3.  But it is
irrelevant to instance 2.  What was sold was the physical object, the
portrait--not a copyright (and I think that portrait is in the public
domain by now, meaning it isn't copyrighted any more).

Therefore, what these examples show is that the issue is not
specifically about copyright, or the other "intellectual property"
laws.  It is a broader issue: that the system typically favors those
who have more power--and that usually doesn't include artists or
writers.

Copyright does contribute to this effect, and so (in other areas) do
patents.  But the effect is not limited to them.