Sure it is, it is a completely different thing. The only way I could see thoughts and concepts being property, is if human law defines reality. But it does not, it just tries it's best to model an idealized version of reality. This really starts to become apparent where legal English diverges from dictionary or common English.
> The only way I could see thoughts and concepts being property, is if human law defines reality.
IP isn't thoughts and concepts, it's expressions and concrete applications, and “property” is a legal relationship; human laws don't define reality, but they do define legal relationships.
