another way to frame the "entitlement to free stuff" is to consider the real costs of duplicating and copying digital assets: there are essentially negligible (and less than marginal)

though I suppose this is a little difference between 'static' digital assets that we don't expect will change, like digital art, or games, or mp3 and so on... and 'runtime software' which we expect will have to continuously adapt, be improved, and will need to get updated. though this is a fine line.

why should only a few select group get to capture the enormous productivity boon enabled by digital copying? that I ask this question doesn't mean I hate capitalism, I think that there are things it's great at, and things at which capitalism sucks.

digital assets are exactly where capitalism becomes the worst, whereas material assets are exactly where capitalism is at its best.