Article omission is common in Eastern Bloc countries (I’ve taught English in Eastern Europe and Russia)…as they (articles) are seen as completely unnecessary, and an utter waste of time to MOST students and even (local, non-native) TEACHERS of English! In fact, it is official policy (from the teachers themselves) in some of those countries that if you have an essay that is over on word count, simply remove ANY articles as the first step in getting the count down.

While it may seem immaterial, the spirit of film/TV/literary writing is accuracy and precise communication of ideas. All parts of speech are important to those principles, and should be encouraged/learned.

“A thing which can be identified as a unique object qualifies as a thing that can be claimed as private property.”

The critical word is “object,” which you define as:

1. anything that is visible or tangible and is relatively stable in form.
2. a thing, person, or matter to which thought or action is directed: an object of medical investigation.
3. the end toward which effort or action is directed; goal; purpose: Profit is the object of business.
4. a person or thing with reference to the impression made on the mind or the feeling or emotion elicited in an observer: an object of curiosity and pity.
5. anything that may be apprehended intellectually: objects of thought.

By your definition, ends or goals can be claimed as private property. I want to lose weight. I want to make more money. By your definition, anything that can be understood or perceived can be claimed as private property. I understand that 2 + 2 = 4. I know that the Earth rotates and I will perceive the sun coming into view over the horizon tomorrow. These things clearly can not be the subject of property rights. So, your definition of “object” needs to be revised.

“The primary question is not who does or does not own this thing. That moral and economic question is answered when we have acknowledged that a thing exists. At that point, those who believe in individual, selfish property rights grant the right of ownership to the human being who brought it forth from nothingness in an act of ex nihilo creation.”

Creation is not necessary nor sufficient for a property right. If I create a beautiful statue out of a hunk of marble, do I own it? If I build a beautiful table out of wood and metal, do I own it? These questions can not be answered without knowing who owned the marble and the wood and metal in the first place.

“To deny this property right is to deny that the thing exists, or that it is a commercial trade good. Without this recognition there is no thing that the audience may enjoy and no thing that its author has made for their use.”

There are things that people place value on (goods) that are not the subject of property rights. For example, imagine that you agree to transfer a sum of money to me if I come to your party and perform a certain action. The exchange creates wealth, but my performance is not the subject of property rights. I own my body and determine what uses to put it to, so you offer a sum of money to induce me to put it to a use that will please you. We both benefit, but the only transfer of owned resources is the transfer of money from you to me. My performance is a good, but is not an ownable resource.