I think where I depart from your analogy is that copyright law has been explicitly framed and discussed using the language of morality by both proponents and opponents.
E.g. copyright maximalists say that pirates are thieves, that they unjustly take from content creators what is rightfully theirs.
Copyright opponents will say that this is a cash grab by greedy corporations, that this will destroy the freedom of the web, etc.
Theft, destroying freedom -- these are explicitly moral claims.
You might be right that morality is not the appropriate framework with which to think about copyright, and I tend to agree, although that certainly hasn't stopped both sides from harnessing moral outrage to buttress their viewpoints.
There are different ways to relate something to morality.
The maximalists claim that copyright violation is identical to theft, whereas their opponents claim that copyright law is being used to make huge profits and destroy freedom. The former puts copyright at the center of the moral spotlight, but the latter pushes it aside and helps us see that justice and freedom are the true moral issues.
E.g. copyright maximalists say that pirates are thieves, that they unjustly take from content creators what is rightfully theirs.
Copyright opponents will say that this is a cash grab by greedy corporations, that this will destroy the freedom of the web, etc.
Theft, destroying freedom -- these are explicitly moral claims.
You might be right that morality is not the appropriate framework with which to think about copyright, and I tend to agree, although that certainly hasn't stopped both sides from harnessing moral outrage to buttress their viewpoints.