No, most of the major criticism came from the DuPont organization which was the largest producer of CFCs. Their attempts failed and the Montreal Protocol which dealt with the issue, is held up a fast and effective example of multilateral cooperation.

It's important to understand that ozone depletion was a far simpler science to develop a theory over, that the number of industry players was small and that other technologies to replace CFCs were readily available. Climate change (though a scientific reality) is a more difficult issue politically.

It's like banning a single particular chemical used in food known to cause cancer, as opposed to banning suger, which an emerging (but not exactly proven) theory points to being a prominent cause of obesity, one of the highest causes of premature death in the developed world.