> Why do people like him think copyright laws are bad and made by rich people, but also support open source software, which relies on the same copyright laws to exist.
There are quite very different open-source licenses. Copyleft licenses do depends on copyright, that is true. On the other hand, typical non-copyleft licenses are in my opinion much less dependent on copyright.
A world without copyright does in my opinion not correspond to any open-source license that I am aware of: you are allowed to reverse-engineer and distribute any software that you want and you must not forbid this to any person using your software or any work derived from it, but nobody is obliged to provide any source code.
In my personal opinion such a license is a gap in the "market of open source licenses", so if some reader feels inspired to create such an open-source license, I utterly encourage the respective reader to do so.
There are quite very different open-source licenses. Copyleft licenses do depends on copyright, that is true. On the other hand, typical non-copyleft licenses are in my opinion much less dependent on copyright.
A world without copyright does in my opinion not correspond to any open-source license that I am aware of: you are allowed to reverse-engineer and distribute any software that you want and you must not forbid this to any person using your software or any work derived from it, but nobody is obliged to provide any source code.
In my personal opinion such a license is a gap in the "market of open source licenses", so if some reader feels inspired to create such an open-source license, I utterly encourage the respective reader to do so.