I'm not actually using those instances as analogies. I am pointing out that the present way of giving priority to "intellectual property rights" rather than to "creative freedom" would historically have deprived us of our shared heritage of immeasurably great things. And I postulate that it is doing just that at present, and will continue to do so into the future.

That doesn't mean that there may not be particular circumstances where limits can reasonably be placed on "creative freedom" as against "intellectual property rights" - but my feeling is that we are in danger of getting the balance all wrong. We really are members one of another, building on what other people have done.