> users of nonfree software are victims of oppression

In view of those users frequently choosing to participate by choosing such software, they aren't "victims" per se. Also, the oppression is _potential_ until the developer implements anti-features which benefit themselves over the software's users.

I agree that once a developer is in that position, the temptation to implement such anti-features is almost impossible to resist, but it is very important that FOSS advocates do not overstate their case.

> in order to put an end to the oppression, we don't need wannabe-oppressors to stop trying to make victims, we need users to reject their offers and choose freedom instead, driving the market towards offerings that respect users choices, rather than towards [oppressive implementations]

If $BIG_SOFTWARE_COMPANY were to stop implementing oppressive anti-features in their software, I would consider that a (small and temporary) win, because it benefits the users of that software. It would still be necessary to seek to change the market (including via legislation and enforcement as well as persuading customers to avoid software with those anti-features) such that the temptation to reimplement those anti-features goes away.