That problem will be with us as long as we use binaries as the primary means of distribution. If you consider that to be a problem, you could put effort into distributions where the packaging is the source code. I know I do.
> Because it's entirely unnecessary? Building the entire archive is a huge amount of effort.
How do you know that the source code provided actually corresponds to the binaries unless you compile them yourself[ with a toolchain you compiled yourself [...]]?
> The terms are at http://www.ubuntu.com/legal/terms-and-policies/intellectual-.... - I probably should have linked them, I've just been writing about this enough lately that it's easy to forget that people might read a single post without context.
No company's policies are perfect. You might be more effective trying to deal with the overall distribution of how software is done rather than imperfections in community leaders. There is a point of diminishing returns in focusing on a small subset of the companies out there while completely ignoring the rest.