re intellectual property = the laws of patents, trademarks and copyrights.
There is another distinct category in some jurisdictions, Father Steve. "Industrial design". [In the U.S. this is captured under the general trademark category and described as a "design trademark", I believe.]
Here is how the intellectual property right known as "Industrial Design" is described by the Canadian Intellectual Property Office [CIPO]:
Industrial designs
A well-designed chair is not just a pleasure to sit on, but a pleasure to look at as well. This can be said for almost every manufactured product: its success in the marketplace will depend not only on its functionality, but on its visual appeal as well. That is why manufacturers invest a great deal of money and know-how in industrial design and why an original design is considered valuable intellectual property.
If you are the creator of, or an investor in, an original industrial design, Canadian law offers you protection from unlawful imitation of your design. The Industrial Design Act, like other forms of intellectual property legislation, works to protect owners while promoting the orderly exchange of information. The way to obtain such protection is to register your design with the Industrial Design Office.
re the law of weightless property
You were fortunate to have a law prof who could make the law spring off the page. Alas, I never had one who could do it.
BTW some movements within "routines" in world-class athletic competitions, such as figure skating and gymnastics are so difficult, enthralling or distinct, they have been named after the individuals who first performed them in competition. The most famous example I can think of is the Salchow, described thus:
"The Salchow jump (pronounced "sow-cow"), named for its originator Ulrich Salchow, is launched off the back inside edge and landed on the back outside edge of the opposite foot."
A unique athletic movement like the Salchow isn't an intellectual property, of course, so those who imitate it do not have to pay a royalty to the originator. The originator has to settle for the honor, no small thing, I grant, of having the movement named after him or her forever.
But world-class athletes invest many long years and enormous money [especially when you consider lost economic opportunities] in the development of their skills, and, in this, they are no different than the developer of an "industrial design" such as a beautiful and unique chair.
In theory, why should we not allow the originators of unique movements used [and subsequently imitated] in world-class athletic competitions to obtain a "design trademark" for their distinctive creation?
After all, these eponymous movements help to sell tickets to athletic competitions around the world whenever these enthralling movements are performed.
Commercial athletic events routinely pay "appearance fees" to star athletes who perform in their events.
Why shouldn't an amateur world-class athlete, who creates and performs an athletic movement so distinct it is named after the athlete, have the opportunity to receive a royalty every time that movement is performed by anyone at a commercial event, whether or not the athlete is still alive. Every time a Frank Sinatra record is played on the radio, Frank Sinatra's estate receives a royalty.
Is a Salchow any less distinctive and enthralling than the stylings of Frank Sinatra [or the stylings of lesser singers who also collect royalties whenever their songs are aired]?
