I often have observed issues involving people who believe they or others own processes, algorithms and names, or that others have exclusive right to such in the visual and tangible art fields. It's quite important to understand what rights people have when they start asserting rights. For instance, a bead maker claiming that they have a 'copyright' on a certain style of glass bead which they seem to think involves a combination of the name, process and result. People use (mis) understandings of IP to intimidate others into not competing with them, despite not understanding what rights they actually have or don't have. The intended audience, other artists, don't understand what rights they or the claimant actually have, either. The main lack of understanding I see is a) that processes cannot be covered by copyright and b) names are not covered by copyright.