His case was materially different

1. Unauthorised network access

2. Intent to distribute licensed material

The labs aren’t doing this. They are doing something similar to you and I downloading torrents. Look, I also think laws should apply somewhat equally to individuals and companies. But this is different.

They certainly seem intent on producing and distributing materials based on that licensed material, and stripping out the licensing and pretending it never existed.

That doesn't seem different to me. Copyright, inherits.

If its fair use, like the companies currently claim, maybe it is different. But I suspect that the insane push to create a copyright carveout in countries around the world, is not unrelated to a judgement that it probably isn't fair use.

> Intent to distribute licensed material

According to the people trying to ruin his life. This is an accused thought crime, not something he actually did. Also, supposing it actually was something he did, your argument is that building a trillion dollar business on stolen licensed material is legally permissible but giving it away for free is worthy of your life being ruined. Wonderfully coherent world view, that is. Piracy is fine, but only if you hoard it to yourself and profit from it!