That's decidedly not true.
Per your example:
> Otherwise the only murderers in jail would be professional assassins.
The people responsible for dropping the nuclear bomb on Hiroshima were not considered criminals and did not go to jail or get punished at all.
War acts are always rationalized by their consequences and the intent behind them.
But this is way off-topic.
Someone already mentioned that copyright laws do indeed distinguish between "commercial and non-commercial copyright infringement".
Actually, I'd argue that even ethically they are treated differently.
If I bought a movie then shared it with my friends, no one would think I'm doing something that's unethical.
If I started selling or renting that movie to my classmates, it's more controversial.
That's decidedly not true.
Per your example:
> Otherwise the only murderers in jail would be professional assassins.
The people responsible for dropping the nuclear bomb on Hiroshima were not considered criminals and did not go to jail or get punished at all.
War acts are always rationalized by their consequences and the intent behind them.
But this is way off-topic.
Someone already mentioned that copyright laws do indeed distinguish between "commercial and non-commercial copyright infringement".
Actually, I'd argue that even ethically they are treated differently.
If I bought a movie then shared it with my friends, no one would think I'm doing something that's unethical.
If I started selling or renting that movie to my classmates, it's more controversial.