Intellectual "property" should, at least, be a controversial form of "property." Starting with the fact that the clause in the US constitution that gave us patent and copyright exclusivity for a limited term doesn't contain the word "property." The word is tendentious.

It's a weak right, if it is one: The term of exclusivity is set by statute. Imagine real property rights having a fixed term defined by the whim of Congress. Indeed imagine any right needing to be enumerated, explicitly, and then thrown to Congress to set a time limit on it.

Nonetheless the Framers thought it worth putting in the Constitution and so we have a duty to keep this right from being controlled by big publishing interests, big pharma, etc. (also not mentioned in the Copyright Clause, just authors and inventors).

Indexing the term of copyright exclusivity to US life expectancy, for example, might make us think harder about a range of national policies.