Frankly, the sense in which a trespasser deprives landowners of the benefit of land is far less tangible and significant than the sense in which a counterfeitin

Frankly, the sense in which a trespasser deprives landowners of the benefit of land is far less tangible and significant than the sense in which a counterfeiting ring deprives an IP owner of part of an income stream, except in the rare case the trespasser is blockading the entrance or deliberately aggravating guests The point is that property law is based around enforceable exclusivity of rights, not around deprivation of use (and making a copy available for free does deprive copyright owners of some portion of their ability to use it as a revenue stream) and contrary to the suggestion up front both intellectual and physical property involve surveillance and [implied] use of violence in order to turn commons into a scarce resource which can be charged for.