Quite the contrary, the whole suggestive false premise is remarkably similar to 90's style anti-GPL FUD. Unless the the author is a card carrying communist and believes anti-business is a good thing, I would say he's not a big fan of copy left.
That said, copy middle, or permissive licenses, or whatever term you want to use, is at least a little more business friendly than copy left.
I personally don't allow copy left code into my applications so I can keep my IP rights clean. I do that for long term option value, aka business reasons.
That's the problem. There is no "copy middle."
I consider all of those to be copy middle
Only if you're the kind of empiricist who hasn't done a systematic survey of what they're trying to figure out, but just assumes that all options are even by default due to the Law of Averages.
That is, unless you're summarizing some study about Free and Open Source software licensing and project growth that I'm unaware of. If you are, I'd be highly interested in reading it.
http://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Comparison_of_web_application...
Another data set: http://www.softwarefreedom.org/resources/2013/lcs-slides-aar...
Some software thrives in copy left, some thrives in copy middle, some thrives in copy right. If you are an empiricist, it remains eminently unclear which license style is best suited for which kinds of projects in the long term.