oh boo fucking hoo. your whole post is just an appeal to emotion

Ahh the irony!

so that you can have the state use violence to enforce your imaginary "property rights"

Hell to the fucking no! I can't imagine myself ever saying anything positive about the state, and I sure as hell would not be advocating the initiation of force.

Look at how Valve and others are making money. They could give their games away and still make money the way DLC works.

Two things. First, it is their game that they developed. They can hand it out for free if they like, they can even pay people to play it if they like! They can also charge people to play it.

And secondly (and this might blow your mind), the "free to play, pay to win" model is profitable. It would not have taken off and it would not continue to be so popular if companies were not even covering their development costs because nobody was paying. Why would they continue to publish games in this model if they were losing money and sending their companies broke? How could they afford to create the sequel if the original sent them into financial ruin?

Or they can make smart enough protection so that people can't reverse engineer and crack it.

So, protect their intellectual property...?

Either way, it's just data that is being transmitted. People can take apart and do whatever they want with it becuase ITS JUST INFORMATION, NOT PHYSICAL PROPERTY!

You're making the point that it's different to taking physical property from someone, in that it doesn't leave them empty-handed. I agree, that's why I've been trying to avoid the use of the word "theft", though it is very similar (something to do with "lost profits").

It's not a victimless crime though. And there are a few examples above that I think are reasonable that you still haven't addressed. It affects individuals too, not just big business. Sometimes right here on reddit I'll see people complaining that prominent YouTubers have incorporated their content (without their permission) into their monetised videos. Shouldn't an amateur photographer be contacted before a company downloads photos from their website for use in a marketing campaign? Shouldn't clothing makers ask artists on Tumblr for permission before they use their designs in their products? Maybe they'll want to be paid, maybe they'll want publicity, maybe they'll want nothing at all. That's their right, and that's all to be worked out in the negotiations. If you can't make a deal, you don't just get to use it anyway.

And I agree with the "take apart" point too, but only so long as they do so for personal use. If they've purchased it then it's their property, and they can do with it as they please.

you're not a libertarian or anarchocapitalist if you are demanding that the state give you a monopoly in the market, so yes, move along.

I am, which is why I never said anything like that. Tell me where.

"what would be the point" and "what is the incentive" are easily answered, just look at how open source development and innovation has surged when patents have been rejected and open collaboration embraced.

And that's fantastic. They have every right to do that and I think it's a great initiative. It's not always feasible though; it might be for the hobbyist developing some great new software in their spare time, but if Apple made iOS open licence from the beginning then there would be a lot of unemployed people, and a lot less innovation.

Profit drives innovation.