Warren and Brandeis offer the idea that protection is only offered when the subject-matter has the "attributes of ordinary tangible property."

First off, what do you make of this?

Secondly, is it possible (and to what extent), if the right to privacy was extended to clearly include protection of spirtual and intellectual property, that triviality in society's general dealings would result? If so, do you feel that would "destroy at once rebustness of thought and delicacy of feeling" as Warren and Brandeis suggested. And are the latter essential to maintain a functional democracy?