I believe that the comparison is fair because "he's simply making a tool that's been using for the purpose it wasn't sold for". All the tools in the comparison

I believe that the comparison is fair because "he's simply making a tool that's been using for the purpose it wasn't sold for". All the tools in the comparison are used in a manner that was not intended by the creator. The point is that it is unfair to charge the creator for the misuse of the tool. The problem is that in our society some "legal-oriented" people think of themselves as very smart because they believe to have attacked the root of the problem; this is under the rationale of "if we eliminate the source, we eliminate all its misuse" (as a side bar, the same rationale is used by the entertainment industry). The problem with this rational is that it destroy the good uses of the tool. And it has a double domino effect, one of chilling some creators (in this case some developers), and one of the thrill of the power on legally hurting someone (I got him! how smart and powerful I am). In reality it hurts the very thing that they claim to defend: the land of the free.