Examine everything wrong with the analogy you just made and you'll understand why nobody else is making that comparison.

I think it's likely the same reason people lionize Robin Hood and loathe the Sheriff of Nottingham: people see Aaron as taking from the rich to give to the poor, and Sam doing things the other way around.

I suspect for some, there's also a sense of precedent-breaking. If one conceives of Aaron's crime as the taking of the data, or rejects that LLMs sufficiently transform ideas to sever the producer's claim on its publication, one might be left wondering: "is the society who believes Aaron deserved punishment the same that thinks OAI does not?"