In case of rights: If I buy a car, I own it and the idea is, that I can do with it, what I want. Most importantly, when I buy a car the manufacturer has no long

In case of rights: If I buy a car, I own it and the idea is, that I can do with it, what I want. Most importantly, when I buy a car the manufacturer has no longer any claim on the car and can for example not force me to just use one brand of gasoline. This is in contrast to intellectual property, where I do not actually own the copy, but I did only license the IP and have a contract with the creator. ( For example the MS EULA of Windows 98 did prohibit the use of it in nuclear power plants. ) On the other hand, I think that the moral basis for property rights is, that physical property is exclusive, in the sense that only one person can use a physical good at any single time. It is therefore morally wrong to steal, not because one enriches himself, but because the victim is deprived of the utility of the good. Again, this is quite different with IP, since the original 'owner' of the first copy is not deprived of the utility of 'his' copy.