I'm a hardcore capitalist but I think all software should be free as in freedom. Am I a hypocrite?

>Books, movies, and music are already free as in freedom.
I don't think i can legally take movie or book, modify it and then resell copies of it.

No, that's a naturally arising contract between you and the property owner.

yes go kill yourseelf

no.
freedom = free markets & free software.

I am a leftard and also think that; it's mostly unrelated to social and economic policy and specific to computers

maybe not sell it due to copyright law, but naturally you could. Software is different because the way people use source code to make an architecture-independent program that makes it near impossible to disassemble it once you get it in machine-language form. RMS was more on the lines of people should be able to figure out what the product being sold to you IS and what it's DOING, especially if it's going to use important numbers like your social, credit card numbers, etc. You shouldn't trust a sleazy used car salesman, you should look under the hood. With books, you can open the pages and write on it or tear out a page you don't like, with movies (at least you used to) be able to copy the disk and modify it to get clips for your cousins wedding or whatever, and music is remixed all the time

this explains why many young people become communists. the need of being part of something (in this case, le freetardism cult) makes us hypocritical

also microsoft:

no

There is truth in what you say, I just wish most young communists didn't misinterpret Capitalism and Free Markets to mean wage cuckery and dealing with high prices...

Also, being a part of something doesn't remove the concept of trade. Especially if it means people need to put in long hours to make that something happen. FSF runs on monetary donations as wall as offer code bounties for tasks done. Freetardism is what people see when people try to follow RMS and have some privacy online but are greeted with a complex UNIX system beyond their understanding while also juggling against the likes of Microsoft and webshit.

Most "freetards" just want to customize their computer non-superficially and misuse of Copyright law is preventing the common-man from innovating

What if you rent someone else what you already rented? And you refuse to leave even if you violated the terms? Isn't he not allowed to use government to push him out? Is that also 'artificially' created by the government?

Enforcing of contracts is just using the government as a tool. Which, all governments are, much like a technology, but I digress.

Ultimately, the renter made an agreement and that agreement is natural. What is not natural is not OWNING where you live. Humans have been constructing and customizing their living quarters for ages and people seem to think that they can act as if they own the place, because current memes say "that's where you live!" Much like how current memes say "College is where you learn!"

I mean artificially to mean entirely constructed by government, all the government laws regarding "renter rights" or landlord powers are just reactions to the natural agreement that was made. Different from developing the agreements themselves, but the way it's heading, it is getting there.

No, OP. Obfuscating source code removes market forces and private sector checks and balances which is the mechanism Capitalism uses to bring prosperity to the masses