He's against software copyrights (in their current form) but he's not against trade-marks, for example, which are usually included in the vague term "intellectual property".

Stallman repeatedly condemns the use of the term "intellectual property", because it: A) lumps together a bunch of unrelated/dissimilar things (Copyrights, patents, trade marks, trade secrets) and B) because it implies that they are all "property" and should be owned, like property, perpetually.

> Stallman supports the free market, he's just anti intellectual property.

Without property rights, I'm not sure what if anything -- except services, a.k.a. labor -- can be consistently monetized in a free market.

In other words, in a world without property rights, the only thing of (monetary) value is labor.

And if memory serves, the labor theory of value is the foundation of Marxian economics; see http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Labor_theory_of_value.

Consequently, it's not clear to me how it's possible even to have a free market in intellectual work product, as opposed to a free market in labor, without some kind of legally-enforceable rights in intellectual property.

Bias disclosure: I'm an IP lawyer by background.

EDIT: The GPL couldn't exist without IP rights, that is, the right (under copyright law) to haul others into court to force them to comply with the GPL terms or to fine them for failing to do so.