The only thing you might complain about is the already existing problem that it's damn hard to get paid for writing good open source software, unless you work for a business like these - this doesn't really make that worse though, or at least not for the wrong reasons.
If they own the copyright and control the only source code available, they can change the license regardless of whether it is permissive or copyleft currently.
If they do only the second, they can shut down the repo regardless of the license, even if they don't change the license, and unless it's something like AGPL continue internal use.
If they don't control the only archive of source code, then even if they can change the license going forward, other people can continue to distribute and fork off from the last Free version (again, irrespective of whether permissive or restrictive.) Unless they both own the copyright and have the legal power to retract the license offer for the earlier code (contrary to the usual express terms of license grants, which may be possible if it is a gratuitous license, but even if it is may not be fully effective in all cases because of promissory estoppel.)
If you're outside sweeping your steps and I walk by and ask to see your broom for a second and then I beat you to death with your broom you aren't to blame because you handed me your broom.
If you build a broom and I ask if I can see it and you say yes you can see it and you are free to make another one like it for yourself and make more to sell for everyone else, then you can't complain about them doing it.
As for the "they didn't envision", then it's entirely their fault. If they put their code online using default copyright law, this wouldn't be allowed, they specifically picked a license that allow it.
Address the cause, not the symptom. Make it so these individuals are more capable of upkeeping their projects. Otherwise, over the long term, you'll end up with projects disincentivized to do the maintenance, leading to a weaker open-source community.
If it’s GPL or similar, the process is slower. They will probably immediately start a grand redesign which will, incidentally, not use the GPL library. In the short run, they will start a replacement implementation of the GPL library, incidentally permissively licensed. Both will take time, but usually gets there.
Both of these cases are seen all the time.
If I have code where that isn't literally free labor for my business/project, I'll keep it closed source. If I have code where that's free labor but also competes with or commodifies my business/project, I'll keep it closed source or use GPL.
This sort of boils down to "only use MIT if you really mean it", right?
And most of it will be security theater that looks good but does little to actually support secure computing because at the end of the day Bob is going to plug in a USB that Mallory drops in the parking lot that says "XXX Pics".
Why would that kill your project? Presumably you’re maintaining it for your own use if it’s a hobby project. Who cares if some for-profit company who wasn’t contributing code or financial support doesn’t use it?
I think any project that's not a hobby project and is responsible for providing a quality, reasonably secure product to paying customers would prefer this. Be it a mega-evil-corp or a scrappy startup or anything in between.
But if you're a founder of such an open-source project that is getting interest from big companies, that sounds like an opportunity to get funding and turn your hobby project into a startup. Pretty sure most of those mega-evil-corps and scrappy startups would rather pay the project founder and originator than some fork.
For anyone that thinks this is hyperbole, this is already close to the current standard for shipping any executable to Windows or macOS machines today. If you want your app to run on either operating system, you first must buy certificates every year and sign your apps with them, and then you must remain in good standing with Microsoft or Apple if you don't want those certificates revoked or if you want them to be renewed.