If you make something and I make a copy of it and sell it as my work then you've lost that freedom, that right, to profit off your labor and to control your property. I'm a fan of taking as little freedom as possible from people. An example would be you writing a novel and I, due to my being more wealthy than you, am able to get your work to press faster than you so I can claim I wrote it, sell it, and keep the profit without rewarding you for your labor. That doesn't foster growth or encourage creation. That deprives the worker of their due profit. That takes away their freedom, that takes away their rights, and it is wrong and serves only to benefit the wealthy or those with means.
Having said that, I'd agree that the duration of protection that copyright affords should be lessened but there's no reasonable alternative and the government is the only facility that can reasonably assure those protections. It is difficult to discuss reform with the slow people insisting that they be heard.
So, yes, you're saying that you don't believe people have the right to profit from their work. It's an interesting way to justify copyright infringement I suppose but you've not really given me any compelling arguments as to why we should abolish them. If you make it then it is yours to decide how it can be used to some extent. If you make it then you have every right to tell me that I can't copy it. If you spent the time, effort, and money to create a new and unique work then you own it - you have control over it, it is your property.
I'm not a fan of taking your property nor am I a fan of taking away your freedom. You may be but, fortunately, you're in the minority. The rest of us are varied but I think you'll find that most would agree that some changes would be beneficial but abolishing would be asinine. I can think of no justification to limit your freedom in these regards. It seems your primary motivation is to be able to take another person's idea and capitalize on it without their permission and without regards to their initial work and that's simply a reduction of freedom that nobody is going to accept. If you want to profit then get off your ass and learn something useful so that you can then create something useful. The idea that you should be able to coast along without doing your own work is absurd.
It is called ownership and yes it does apply to intangibles. It is YOUR idea, your work, your code, your art, and you have a right to control it and profit from its use for a reasonable amount of time (I'd argue that it is an unreasonable amount of time currently, fuck Disney and their mouse). You have that right because you made it. I'm not at liberty to copy your work and profit from it without your permission. If you want to work for free then be my guest but your morality isn't justification for stripping the rights of other people away. We tend to value our freedom, you're not at liberty to deprive us of our freedom.
It is the internet, I don't expect random anonymous pixels to change your mind. But, no. No, I'm not at liberty to take your rights away. I'm not at liberty to take your work and call it my own. Your arguments have been examined, measured, and found lacking. Nobody is going to abolish copyright and your bleating interrupts discussion that may lead to productive copyright and/or patent reforms that could be actually be beneficial. I've wasted enough time on you, you're dismissed.