I think a lot of people who are in favour of Open Source Software (OSS) do have similar opinions for other forms of artificial scarcity. The problem comes from

I think a lot of people who are in favour of Open Source Software (OSS) do have similar opinions for other forms of artificial scarcity. The problem comes from an external system that doesn't really allow for information to be produced and distributed for everyone while at the same time incentivising producers to put in the labour required for these information products to exist. And I think that's the core of the issue. If software, after being produced, can be distributed to everyone at only the cost of duplicating it which is pretty minimal then it is clear that putting these monopolistic restrictions is hindering progress. And Harry Potter is actually a very good example, because J.K. Rowling has always been very against any form of derivative work such as fanfiction and as copyright laws extend then she is given more and more power to control this product that is essential nothing but information. So, I really think you're missing the mark here because copyright laws are precisely something people that are for OSS decry. And from there is where this critique arises. How is it that in this system where we have the capabilities of distributing information to anyone that wants it at almost no cost the only way to promote the discovery and creation of information is by creating artificial monopolies. When you say it's OK to want to copyright creative work, I really question that, is it really okay? Is it really desirable? Is it good for society? If our the only solution our socio-economic system gives us is this, then maybe we ought to question those fundamentals as well. Information is not going away and it only gets easier and cheaper to reproduce; so if it's pushing the system in this way then maybe we need to change the system.