> In both C++ and Rust, "moving" an object will still copy the struct fields, but

Most people consider a shallow copy a "copy", certainly a shallow copy isn't a "reference"! One of the big problems in this space is in fact the divergence of terminology that leads to arguments like this.

The introduction of move semantics to C++ was a terrible, terrible mistake; not because it doesn't solve a real problem but because the language is objectively much worse now as a routine tool for general developers. People used to hack on code to implement features, now they get confused over and argue about how many "&" characters they need in a function signature.

It was a problem that was best left unsolved, basically.