I'm sure, as the article says, if they search every @gmail user because of one @gmail criminal they will eventually search the criminal too. How is that a different story?
They didn't search every @gmail user, they searched what would be roughly equal to (in gmail's commercial case) a payment provider for gmail, and people loosely related to such a provider. It's a flawed comparison, obviously.
Yeah. The proper analogy is: Somebody doing something they didn't like had a gmail address, and they raided the internal servers of Google's German sales office.