Why would (1) be necessary? GPL software is not consigned to the public domain or ownership automatically transferred to the FSF. It is still the property of the original developer, who are simply distributing and licensing its use only to those who comply with a certain set of conditions.
Proprietary licences will sometimes prohibit resale or modification, for instance. Licences like the GPL do the exact opposite: they allow modification and resale under the condition that these subsequent derivative works are licensed under the same terms (if distributed).
I would have thought being able to decide the conditions under which others can use your private property is an idea the most ardent capitalist would support.
I agree 100% with your last paragraph. I think the issue for many libertarians, however, is this: should thought be considered personal property, thus under legal protection by the state?
Proprietary licences will sometimes prohibit resale or modification, for instance. Licences like the GPL do the exact opposite: they allow modification and resale under the condition that these subsequent derivative works are licensed under the same terms (if distributed).
I would have thought being able to decide the conditions under which others can use your private property is an idea the most ardent capitalist would support.