Well, to be fair, I don't believe in IP laws regarding organization of pixels. You can own the medium upon which an idea (in this case, art) is imprinted on, but you can't claim your ownership was violated if someone uses a copy of a copy. Copying doesn't impinge on your ownership of the original.
However, you're absolutely right. The government is incapable of properly administering anything, including the military, which is ostensibly the only legitimate purpose it could serve.
So, if I am hearing you right, you think that I have no rights as a stock photographer to license my property in the same way anyone can rent out any other property they rightfully own? Have you ever rented a hotel room (it's only space, so why should any one charge for space and air?)
I'm the one who has invested thousands of dollars in my business over the years, so you think it is perfectly OK for others to benefit from my hard work without them having to spend a dime? I have to pay small business taxes and all other business related expenses, not the person using my work for free.
As you said, why should we pay for everyone to have healthcare? Also, why should my peers and I have to pay for others to have free eyecandy to make them money? Just like you are not in the business of paying for the healthcare of others, I am not in the business of providing free work for others either. It is the same mentality - give me something for nothing and let others do the work!
If I owned only the medium, as you suggest, that would mean I have the right to sell or license that one CF Card with the original images on it? I can't imagine the business headaches that would create! I would be able to shoot only one image per CF card, because no one is going to want to "buy" or license every image I shoot!
The conclusion has to be, that you don't think I have a right to my business in this free country of the USA, but others do have a right to take what I created because they want something for nothing! Something is very wrong with this picture.
I think I may write a blog post that says "Please Stop Demanding Socialized Images!!" LOL!
"in the same way anyone can rent out any other property they rightfully own? Have you ever rented a hotel room (it's only space, so why should any one charge for space and air?)"
No. Not in the same way at all. A much more apt comparison would be if I owned a hotel and you built a replica of that hotel on your own property with your own materials, then I sued you for stealing my intellectual property.
Ideas are not property. They're not scarce, nor are they rivalrous, so they lack the fundamental qualities that make property rights applicable. Does a copy of your work remove the original from your possession?
Now there's nothing wrong with creating licensing agreements for using your work, which would prohibit use outside of agreed upon terms. I'm all for that. However, that's not the crux of your argument. The crux of your argument is that you own the work that you put into producing these images. You don't own labor. You own the product of your labor. You also don't own copies others make that haven't entered license agreements with you. It's not theft. No one's stealing from you. You can't steal something that doesn't exist yet (future earnings).
I think that's a crazy argument. LOL! I'm not going to debate it any longer though. I know my legal rights, and know I legally own my images. You have opinions about those rights, and you are entitled to that! The blogger who recently had to pay up $7,500 for using an image she had no right to use, found that out the hard way.
You can laugh all you want, but you can't provide a logically consistent moral argument in favor of your position that derives from private property ethics. Since you clearly believe in private property, you need to think through your positions, rather than utilizing the government to prosecute people for perceived injustices.
I'm not saying you shouldn't be paid for your images, nor that you shouldn't shout down plagiarists every chance you get, but a copy isn't theft. It's not. It simply doesn't meet the criteria for being theft.