Nah, nothing here is a special advantage of US firms.

The hacks are pretty bland as long as there is no mens rea and the hacked victims do not want to press charges. This isn't a "subsidy", it's just our normal legal process at work.

The pollution question is winding its way through court systems and getting a lot of pushback. I wouldn't call this a subsidy, just a slow bureaucracy. And at any rate this isn't special to the US; certainly China's environmental policy is far more lenient.

With the training data, again there's nothing specific to US corporations here. Anyone can use that dataset. It's just how our legal system works. You might not like it, but it's the accepted law right now. This doesn't meet any reasonable definition of "subsidy".

On the other hand, shoveling billions of dollars of taxpayer funds into corporations is by definition a subsidy. Full stop.