Really obscure: be more clear.

The creators are not simply the outcome of a populated space but of its navigation, through orientation, implying the sought, the accepted and the refused. Their «fruit» is produced accordingly - and not just "owing to society", but also "in spite of it" - and represents an intention, which is conditional to the product itself.

Intention, orientation and living "in spite" of society is part and parcel of the social individual. I'm not putting him down; I'm just deflating him. I'm not devaluing individualism either, it's a tool, but, to me, to say that an individual has autogenerated his achievements is like saying that a plant's flower does not come from the plant.

While I agree wholeheartedly, since the overly-clever invention of copyright that ship has kind of sailed. The vast majority of IP is owner controlled, because a few people hundreds of years ago thought it would be cheaper to just throw things into the court system, rather than deal with taxation, subsidies, and other regulation.

And way back then - when courts where a thing, but a broad tax base was not, and in any case society didn't have the kind of near-instant communication networks available now - that might even have made sense.

And yet society grants this privilege; rather pervasively in fact.

Sure, but we do that all the time don't we? It's called private property.

I agree with your intention, but there's a balance to be struck between individual contributions and those of wider society.

Indeed. I would like your life savings, please, as I too am part of society. Venmo or PayPal?