I agree that using other people's equipment is not proper, and I think that the world would be a much better place if all of us paid attention to the rules. After all, we all supposedly had a hand in making the rules, and the rules are there to benefit and protect society.
Unfortunately, the people who brought this case are in no way concerned with rules. To them, rules are a tool to use to get what they want, and if you are willing to follow the rules, these people will gladly use you to get what they want.
And what they want, is money.
So - Who is using who's equipment?
You and I pay taxes. These taxes (a portion of them) go to a public fund which is used to pay for things for the public. Some of these funds (a decreasing portion) go to the public, which includes all of our society, to educate themselves. Later these people derive profits from this education, and the profits are distributed somewhat equally. These people also take on varied careers and contribute to the diversity of our society.
Some of these funds are given to private companies to pay for military development so we can defend ourselves when necessary, and the technology and profits derived from this development (i.e. research, or education) are given almost completely to the private companies that do the development. Their corporate officers get bonuses of several of my year's salary, they are given easy access to the institutions of government and are allowed to affect government policy, etc.
How much more of the funds end up in the hands of private companies as opposed to being used to benefit the public?
So again, who is using who's equipment?
Is a network administrator using this state's equipment? Or is a citizen of the USA using equipment that he has paid for, lock, stock and barrel?