I agree. I want to point out, though, that intellectual property and the “respect” of it is actually quite a Western-derived mindset. In a previous post of mine, I pointed out that Chinese culture has a long history of believing that the way to excel is to COPY the best. The idea of “it’s not moral to copy someone better than myself” is not fostered as strongly as it is in the individual-oriented mindset of the West. (In fact, the individual-oriented mindset began as far back as the earth-as-the-center-of-the-universe (geocentric) theories that existed in the West until the 17th century. On the contrary, the Chinese have long held that earth was simply a temporal place existence–a tiny bit of the whole of the universe.) In Chinese culture, it has long been an obligation to copy someone better because the logic is, “How else would you be better? Certainly not by yourself!” When you have a history built on god-like emperors versus lowly peasants, it’s easy to see why the general consensus was that the individual could wield only little power/influence.
ADD: Here’s an example of Chinese mentality of innovation: bullet trains. Whether or not you like it, that’s what it is.
Having said that, I also believe that design can sometimes make much more progress when it’s a collective effort and when intellectual property is NOT a priority. You’ll see that in designs for social changes, philanthropic efforts, and community services. Intellectual property rights definitely have their place in design, but I would also argue it’s not always a requirement for bringing out good design.