Yet neither ever spoke against the concept of patents and copyright which assures private ownership of intellectual property.
Agreed, Natural Law. Neither Einstein nor Bohr ever did, to the best of my knowledge. Perhaps both realized it would be foolish to adopt a policy of "socializing" intellectual property. (I.e., that would be a great way to ensure that scientific creativity goes into a deep, irrecoverable swoon....) I think they meant "science as a public enterprise" in a different sense.
Bohr, for instance, puts the onus on scientists to communicate their findings in ways accessible to reasonable, intelligent members of the public. Then the findings themselves must be widely publicized — not just crammed into specialist/professional, peer-reviewed journals. The public has the right to know what is going on, and to understand the issues. For the results of science have been known to have profoundly disturbing effects on the public sphere. After all, "Bohr's atom" eventuated in the thermonuclear bomb.