Well, they're fundamentally different. Real property is scarce; intellectual property isn't.
"What is amusing about these discussions is the fact that those who would argue to the death for the concept of ownership for a piece of real estate don't accord the same rights to a piece of intellectual property."
I don't think the ownership is given up or altered in this case. It is well established that a buyer can alter intellectual property for his or her own use, so editing out offensive material in a DVD for the buyer's own use in a legal manner (a machine or by edit after purchase) does not alter ownership.
Well, they're fundamentally different. Real property is scarce; intellectual property isn't.
Profitable intellectual property is very scarce. When Steve Ross bought Warner Bros. in 1969 for a bargain basement price, he saw the company's value wasn't in the personnel or offices or real estate. He saw an amazing film library. The right intellectual property has huge value. Even banks see it as an asset that can be leveraged for loans.