Agreed, regulators granting your company a monopoly is definitely the opposite of capitalism in a significant sense, even if the company does use wage-labor to produce products whose ownership rests with the owners of the means of production rather than the laborers.

State regulations which are exploitable due to lobbyism which is capital transferred into law generating power. Neo-Feudalism is the final form of unregulated capitalism and has always been it.

Why not just step forward into the Acceptance-Stage of Ideology-Death, instead of being caught with the intellectual trousers down half a century later by ones googling grandkids on a witch hunt?

Why wouldn't a capitalist corporation choose to lobby the government to bend the rules in their favor if they think that that would give the best ROI? In what version of Capitalism would this not happen? What would remove this incentive structure?

Only the most naive understanding of capitalism holds those two things as opposites, or mutually exclusive.

lobbying is just utilizing accumulated capital to create favorable conditions. that capital was accumulated by a capitalist firm. that firm's competitive strategy might be aesthetically unappealing to you, but the firm exists in the first place because it can more efficiently utilize resources than any individual could.

capitalism is a way of organizing production with workers being paid a flat rate and owners keeping all additional value added by the workers in exchange. is that not how pharmaceutical companies are arranged?

of course, true capitalism has never been tried, but this is what you might call 'actually existing capitalism'