Yes, that seems generally accepted. (The reverse seems also widely accepted: not everything that is illegal is wrong.)
What I'm puzzled about is that people apparently feel strongly about this situation. I thought it was well established that one may try to earn money with free software that one has not written. More to the point, I don't think there's any (moral) obligation to share the money one does earn that way with those that did write that free software. I'm pretty sure that licenses that add such an obligation (and thus make it a legal obligation) would be considered non-free.