> Where does it say in the GPL, that you would be entitled to perpetual updates for every copy?
I never said that it did?
I'm saying that "unlimited free shit" [0] is seemingly a direct side effect of software freedom, as the FSF has defined software freedom.
I actually then went on to say that it would indeed be interesting to see a slightly less libre license that didn't anchor the use-instance price to within an epsilon of the distribution cost. So I don't really know what you're trying to argue with here.
[0] actually: widespread use of libre licensed software that has been distributed to others at arm's length
Where does it say in the GPL, that you would be entitled to perpetual updates for every copy?
Remember, Stallman founded the GNU project because he was unable to patch some Unix kernel bug or something-or-other due to lack of source access.
"Unlimited free shit" was never part of the plan.