The writing on it is a bit misleading. "Is facing up to...", ok sure. But the rapists were also facing more time than they received. Seems wrong to compare potential time with actual time.
Plus there's a question of how many charges the hacker dude is facing. If he's facing five charges with a maximum sentence of two years per charge (example, I don't know), then yeah he's theoretically facing ten years. This doesn't mean that all charges will ultimately be pursued, that he'll be convicted on all of them or that he'll serve the maximum time. And it really isn't a reason to decrease the maximum sentence for any specific law.
The bit about the FBI was just sensationalism. The article says the kid hunts (owns a gun) and has a pit bull. Showing up in force is just common sense. Never understood people who seem to think the time to put on riot gear is after
the rocks start flying or else you're being too mean and scary.
U.S. law needs to be to be updated to reflect the values of the free flow of information.
And there's the crux of it. This is less about worrying about rapists and more about weakening laws that restrict hacking.