I don't see that it really matters in terms of old properties Star Wars and stuff. More SW films is good for customers; no more SW films is the same as it is now.
Agreed.
In terms of D&D - I wonder how different Disney would be to Hasbro. I mean, on our scale they're both giant behemoths. I guess third-party products might - in the long run - be affected. But there aren't many 3rd party D&D products these days anyway.
And agreed.
For artists and innovation? It doesn't affect artists innovating with new stuff.
Here I don't agree, though. Sure, as long as you're being truly unique and innovative you're in the clear, but there are very few
genuinely new ideas out there.
But the issue comes when you're working in something
close to existing IP - a story about a schoolboy wizard, or something about giant transforming robots. Provided you stay clear of the actual IP owned by the various people, you
should be fine. After all, Hogwarts is nothing more than an archetypal boarding school crossed with magic, and Rowling can't claim ownership over either concept - only her
specific implementation.
However, if you were to actually write a story about such a thing (and achieve enough success to be noticed), there's a real good chance that Rowling's people would send a C&D. At which point you'd very quickly find your backers pulling the plug on their involvement in your project. There wouldn't even need to be a case - faced with just the risk of losing, all but the bravest of backers would walk away.
(Also, see the way TSR hounded Gary Gygax after he left. Several times he tried to publish a game, only to see TSR sue. At which point, either his publishers just pulled the plug or, in the best case, they'd agree to settle. Of course, as part of the settlement, TSR agreed to buy out the game... which they promptly shelved. The net effect was that GG couldn't publish a game - which wasn't good for him, wasn't good for us, and actually wasn't all that good for TSR either.)