The flip side of OP’s point is that successful competitors will use this rationalization to give themselves some ethical standing when they are actually the fir

The flip side of OP’s point is that successful competitors will use this rationalization to give themselves some ethical standing when they are actually the first-mover bad actor. Whether or not the competition is doing it, the belief that they could drives the Machiavellian preemption described here. That said, it is the nature of the game. If you want to preserve your ethical stance sometimes the only winning move is not to play.