First, the phrase "intellectual property" is obviously not scarce.
We have been debating the scarcity and rivalrousness of ideas. I think the pro-IP crowd has sufficiently demonstrated that at least some ideas are scarce, and that at least some ideas are rivalrous. For example, bitcoins are both scarce and rivalrous. If you continue to insist on these points, you are grinding your wheels in the mud. I believe the discussion now is shifting to what is the most libertarian theory of property? Is it the labor theory of property, as Locke and Rothbard thought, or is the first occupier theory, as Kinsella claims?
Hoppe is wrong on this, just as he is wrong about his argumentation ethic. He is a great thinker and has contributed a great deal to Austrian economics. But he has also made mistakes.
“The welfare of the people in particular has always been the alibi of tyrants.” — Albert Camus