1) copyright is a different concept that I have not discussed here. It has some legitimacy but not as far as the use of public force to impose fees for copying. (see 5).)

2&3) I don't see your point about Coding, Coding Languages and compilers. If you wan't to talk about difference between source code and compiled code, I don't see the issue. Compiled code is still a sequence of data and therefore it can be copied and reused.

4) I'm french and sometimes when I write in english I let mistakes like this drop. This is silly but there's no reason to be that contemptfull.

5) Claiming a poem is yours when it's not, is something that goes far beyond just learning it. This is the real meaning of intellectual ownership : when you claim having made something although you have not, this is identity theft, and this has to be punished by law. But when you copy something without pretending that you made it, I don't see any reason why it should be punished. Please consider this as a very important difference. It's the difference between copying and counterfeiting.

It is just the same as a painter that would made a copy of a master's work. As long as he doesn't imitate the signature and doesn't try to sell the painting pretending it's a real, there is no legal offense, because there is no lie, no deception whatsoever.

Law must protect the sign : but it must protect its integrity, not its commercial value. Only market forces should decide its value.

6) Again : internet is made using many protocols and software that are mostly free and open. When you send an email, you don't pay anything for the people who wrote SMTP.

The reason is that no price would have any real economic justification. Say you want to charge $1 for your piece of code. Why $1 ? Why not $10 ? Why not $.01 ?

Truth is that when you sell one item (a digital copy of your code), it costs you $0, that's why you can sell it at virtually any price. There is no rational justification for any price of a zero marginal cost product.