Thank you so much for that comment! I never connected these two. In fact, it was just out of frustration that I even wrote the last paragraph. It was not well-considered.

I don't know. I need to think about this some more. Thanks again.

Intellectual Property is as meaningful as Physical Property. The rules are different for each, of course, but saying "physical property exists, intellectual property does not exist" is an extreme position that shows a lack of understanding of what "property" fundamentally is.

I wasn't trying to say that intellectual property didn't exist. I think it's obvious that it does, at least in some form. (Heck, the patent system is builton the very idea.)

Perhaps in an 'ideal' world, IP wouldn't exist. This is far from an ideal world, though, and besides, the so-called "ideal world" would be extremely boring.

I think DRM takes it too far, though. My computer is my physical property. I may not have built it entirely from scratch, instead relying on vendors like Intel to manufacture the components, but it's mine and if I want it to perform a certain way, then the only thing which should be able to stop me is the law itself - not some DRM designed to help me stay in compliance with some company's idea of the law, which is inevitably biased towards their own needs.

[edit: To be clear, since I realise I sound a little extreme here - EULAs are designed to be legal contracts. As such, if you think I've broken (accidentally or intentionally) a clause in your EULA, then unless it's obvious to all involved parties that I've broken the contract (and thus broken the law), it should be up to a court to decide if a) the EULA is a valid contract, and b) if I have in fact broken said contract. If so, go ahead and punish me. Until then, it doesn't make sense to treat, for example, legal paying customers as if they were pirates when they're not.]