I'm not a lawyer, but I really don't see a fundamental difference here - photocopiers have existed for a long time.

You can own a book. You just don't have the right to make copies of that book. Why can't you own an ebook?

The way I see it: you own the book itself, but don't own the writing and story - the information - contained within it. In my mind, ownership as a concept for non-physical goods is much closer to the idea of copyright.

Oddly enough, I suppose every book I own here has legalese in it saying that I don't have the right to lend, sell or "otherwise circulate" it without the publisher's consent.

>No ebook license (or any other "virtual" good) will ever have a license that confers 'ownership'.

You've forgotten about the public domain.

Actually, I'd say that the underlying issue is that the very concept of "ownership" simply cannot be made to apply consistently to goods that cost basically nothing to replicate.

All the hubub about IP and DRM and piracy follows from this mismatch.