Look, I'm not saying it wouldn't be worse if a rival company broke in and stole the plans to give themselves a competitive advantage, but the kid still knew it

Look, I'm not saying it wouldn't be worse if a rival company broke in and stole the plans to give themselves a competitive advantage, but the kid still knew it was wrong and proceeded for his own sake (not money, but bragging rights and curiousity). So his crime wasn't grossly malicious, but it was grossly irresponsible considering the damage caused. Quite simply, he should have known better. I know what a false dichotomy is - and it's exactly what you are purveying by insisting (so far without justification) that crimes with physical effects are not comparable to those without.