Part of the harm that could come out of this is the "split hair" (but profoundly important "split hair") difference between something that is owned "property" (ie: I may have bought a physical copy of a book, first ownership doctrine usually applies) and something that is "licensed" (but I don't own the rights to story that the book tells, copyright applies). In either case, the term 'intellectual property' seems like a misnomer to me. To my understanding, the US Constitution spells out a lot of legal intellectual rights but never confuses them with property rights and, as I understand it, points out that these intellectual rights are limited. Just my two cents to that argument.