This type of reasoning is completely out of place in the context of a developer having full control of the license they release their own code under.
There are literally hundreds of different software licenses. You can just pick the exact one that matches your ethical world view.
There is no reason to pick one that doesn't reflect your intent, then being a passive aggressive asshole about it when others follow the license as described.
First of all, I never said anything about being a "passive aggressive asshole."
Second of all, you didn't even respond to specific point I made. You just repeated the GP's argument with extra force. You didn't even explore the notion of what happens if your ethics are different from what laws prescribe. For example, if you think that others should not plagiarize your work but simultaneously believe that monopoly copyright enforced by a third party (usually governments) should also not happen, then you're stuck. You can choose a license that permits others to plagiarize while simultaneously being ethically opposed to the act of plagiarism because you disagree with using laws to enforce your moral opposition to plagiarism.
There are literally hundreds of different software licenses. You can just pick the exact one that matches your ethical world view.
There is no reason to pick one that doesn't reflect your intent, then being a passive aggressive asshole about it when others follow the license as described.