Yes, this is why I'm careful to limit my criticism specifically to the belief that information can be "owned." That's subtly different from the belief that we can make contracts around information.

But if you ask the average layperson or watch popular media about data, they speak and think in terms of ownership. That's the wrong model, and it leads to the wrong assumptions and conclusions.

From what I understand, this wasn't always the case. The belief rose alongside the term "intellectual property" in recent decades, which was itself popularized by media companies who have the rights to lots of information, and who stand to gain financially the more we shift toward conceiving of these rights as permanent ownership.

Ah, I see. Okay, yeah, I think we're in agreement then. OP article is about GDPR-based suit.