Patents and copyright both serve to protect intellectual property.
In that they are similar, but please don't try to tell me that writing a good story is on the same value level with inventing a revolutionary device. In transmission of scientific results, for instance, copyright actually hobbles the process.
The concept of "intellectual property" is modern, artificial, and dubious. It conflates patent and copyright and is used to suppress innovation and guarantee income for entities who do not contribute to innovation. In the Constitution, patent and copyright were to be secured for a "limited time", for the benefit of discoverers, inventors, and creators. Modern law enforces copyright beyond the reasonable lifetime of the creator ensuring that new works will never enter the public domain in anyone's lifetime, and the conflation means derivative work must leap an impossible bar to be considered derivative and not identical. Thus there is no effective limit.
I read an analysis which applied modern rules to the invention of the steam engine. The conclusion was all of modern technology would be infringing on the intellectual property of the inventor of the steam engine. Thomas Newcomen's descendants would own the world.
Youtube is one big copyright violation.