That's the problem with bubbles. IP abolitionists visit sites and forums that already support their view, and hence have a distorted view of the world. IP maximalists visit sites and forums that already support their view, and hence have a distorted view of the world. There are incredibly few centrists in the IP debates. So, go on thinking that everyone outside of here believes that IP is a form of natural property. You are not going to make progress until you acknowledge the existence and proliferation of counter-arguments, and attempt to meet them in the middle.
Well, actually, you are going to make progress, lots of progress, because your side has more lobby money to spend. That's not justice, or the triumph of logic, or whatever. It's just plain old brute force.
I agree otherwise, except the framing of the argument between "IP abolitionists" and "IP maximalists". The problem is, that "Intellectual property" in itself is a loaded term. When you start discussing issues in the terms of "intellectual property", you are already introducing bias to the conversation, by implicitly acknowledging the validity of the concept of "intellectual property".
Also, just for the record, I don't think being a centrist is automatically a virtue in every issue. Sometimes it's better to take a stance in one direction or another, even if that stance is considered "extreme" by most. A lot of world-changing ideas have been considered "extreme" when they were first introduced.