I knew somebody would miss the point entirely.

I wasn't saying the bike is the equivalent of a Van Gogh. I was saying that there are some types of property that are held in stewardship. The Van Gogh is an obvious illustration of the idea that "ownership" doesn't give one the right to do whatever one pleases with the "property." And stewardship isn't limited to Van Goghs-- it's applicable to a wide range of "property."

On the continuum of use, ranging from complete destruction, through irretrievably altering the property, through preserving the property intact for future generations, something that is common and readily and easily replaceable and meant to be consumed and discarded may be at the complete destruction end of the scale. On the other hand, the closer the property approaches the uncommon, and is not readily and easily replaceable, and is not meant to be consumed and discarded, the closer it is to the end of the continuum at which property, while used and enjoyed, is nevertheless preserved intact for future generations.