It's worth noting that plagiarism is a separate concept, and not really a legal issue (unless of course you are bound by contract not to plagiaries, which I'd imagine most academics and journalists are in their employment contracts). This is also why the MIT license needs an attribution clause.

Karl Fogel proposed an experiment, that legislators introduce a bill proposing a right to attribution, essentially making plagiarism illegal, to gauge the media industry's reaction. His prediction was that they would balk at the proposal.

Not the OP, but I think that question moves the goalposts.

The states involved in this dispute recognize the idea of intellectual property and protect it with copyright. Questioning the validity of intellectual property as a concept is a very different from the question at hand.

To wit, an author in Germany should be able to expect that his copyright would be respected by other entities in Germany, as they're all bound by the same laws. Regardless of our feelings regarding the moral validity of copyright or intellectual property.