I don't really buy that consumer protection and antitrust regulations actually result in a better free market. I think the market is better off doing it's thing rather than a bunch of politicians trying to make it more efficient.
What do you mean by "better free market?" Are you using terms like "efficient" and "free market" in their technical sense or are you just saying that you don't like regulations?
Definitionally regulations are a divergence from an ideal free market. Provably, under some conditions (which don't exist in the real world) a market will converge to some definition of efficiency. Practically, no politician cares about this.
Politicians aren't trying to make the market more efficient with regulations -- good politicians are trying to protect their constituents, bad ones are mostly trying to protect their donors.
The funny thing is IP laws are by definition monopolies protected by government. Every one of the big tech "quasi-monopolies" are sitting on a mountain of it.
Be careful, IP is a hodgepodge of things, like copyrights, patents, trademarks, and trade secrets.
To pick one: trade secrets are not a monopoly. If you figure out the secret ingredient in Coca Cola (by legal means), you are free to use that knowledge and even publish it.
Similarly, I have my reservations about whether patents are a good idea; but I don't mind trademarks nearly as much.
