could it be praxis to defend personal property?
There's a debacle going on the gamer communities about the ownership of video games and so on, the gist of the matter is that when someone buys a digital copy of a game they are actually, in a sense, renting a license.
Often people in these discussions cite the "You'll own nothing and be happy" phrase from the article "welcome to 2030" published in 2016 by the World economic forum and written by a Social Democrat politician named Ida Auken, it's clear that people post memes and write the prahse in comments because they fear that the issue of video game ownership is jut the tip of the Iceberg and that personal property as a whole might be in danger because of the changes brought forth by the digital age.
I think there's some credence to the argument (but It's just a hunch more than a informed opinion) because the capitalist class will naturally adapt to what's best for itself and it seems better (from my perspective) for them to turn personal property into a rent-adjacent model, I guess it could be called the 'alienation of personal property'? It would tie personal property back to the ownership of the means of production in a immediate and direct way such that the only true proprietors of even personal property left in our societies would be the capitalists, which definitely gives them more power, I also believe that it's safe to say that the WEF is a bourgeois organization and they would not publish an argument that doesn't support their reason to be.
So my main questions are:
Do you think there's credence to this scenario? Is it even something new? If it is new and there's really a ideological shift going on within the bourgeoisie in regards to the ownership of personal property, what could the communist stance be on it?