A key aspect of ownership is enforceability, not within a legal system per se, but the absolute physical ability to keep a thing from falling into the possession of another through terms that are not mutually agreed upon. Obviously, most legal systems do not enforce the policy that only one person or so many people can use the word "I", but it should be consistent for every single thought, that no special privileges be granted by a legal system to whoever applies for so-called 'ownership' of that idea. As for the metaphysical ownership of thought, each person creates thought as an independent agent, no matter the input. Every genesis is a testament to their capacity to comprehend, understand, and fundamentally generate, not replicate, the thought. The mere fact that one can think about Zelda or Marth means that he has the right to do with his creation whatever he wishes, disregarding a 'right' per se in a given legal system. It is inconsistent that one can own "Smash" and not own "The".
I do not know how healthy our relationship as kin would be. I respectfully decline, sir. <3