Final answer:
Locke's natural rights theory struggles to apply to intellectual property: firstly because it is based on physical labor improving natural resources, unlike intellectual creations, and secondly, because intellectual property rights can be transferred, unlike the inalienable natural rights Locke describes.
Step-by-step explanation:
John Locke's theory of natural rights does not easily translate to the concept of intellectual property for two main reasons. First, Locke's notion of property is tied to the physical improvement of natural resources through one's labor. Intellectual property, however, doesn't deplete natural resources and often can be shared without diminishing the original creator's holdings. Second, natural rights according to Locke are inalienable and cannot be transferred or surrendered, whereas intellectual property rights are designed to be transferred, traded, and sometimes waived, which is more characteristic of legal rights than natural rights as described by Locke.