What I have said applies to anything that puts "capital" first and foremost. From my perspective, you're trying to write off the critique via no-true-Scotsman.

I agree that people want to think of free markets and capitalism as being intertwined and inseparable, but I'm pointing out how they end up being in conflict. And as capitalism continues to evolve, this conflict continues to grow.

> Copyright was not created from regulatory capture, copyright was expanded and abused will beyond its original remit via regulatory capture

Sure. And every time it was expanded, the amount of capital increased while market freedom decreased! Capitalism and free markets are not one and the same, but rather two different qualities that can end up being in conflict.

Ultimately if one wants to advocate for freedom, one needs to focus on advocating for it directly, rather than for an economic system that is increasingly in conflict with it. You can still think of economics in terms of capital (and I think it makes sense to). But the desires of capital need to be made deliberately subservient to freedom rather than vice-versa.