If the GP is advocating that ideas and their expressions shouldn't be 'private' if expressed publicly, then comparing it to stealing is incorrect.
> Just because it's possible to steal something, you/society should allow it to happen?
A closer comparison would be: you heard me tell a story. You don't think society should allow you to tell it to someone else because I 'own' it, and to tell someone else is to 'steal' from me.
What if I don't want to be "flattered"? I don't really see anything flattering about someone copying one of my ideas when I don't want them to copy it.
You seem to be using a different definition to the word "flattery" than any I know. Being copied is inherently flattering whether you want them to copy you or not.
Flattery is a two-way act to me, why else did you use the word? You basically said "accept that someone copied you against your wishes and just ignore it".
I can see your point generally, but in this case, I can't see how being copied is anything other than flattering. It means the idea was good.
Regards your second sentence, that is what I'm saying. A large company that's put lots of resources into something fighting of another company who "stolen" their idea, while tedious, makes some sense. For an individual, I can't see how it's worth the time, stress or money to worry about copyright.
> Just because it's possible to steal something, you/society should allow it to happen?
A closer comparison would be: you heard me tell a story. You don't think society should allow you to tell it to someone else because I 'own' it, and to tell someone else is to 'steal' from me.