>In this situation, the noble does not own the painting, so much as they possess it and have only been granted a license to privately view it, not a license to

>In this situation, the noble does not own the painting, so much as they possess it and have only been granted a license to privately view it, not a license to show it to others, and further license only to reproduce it for their own personal archival purposes What is the point of making such an "analogy"? Might as well say the noble has a copy of Die Hard in their DVD collection.