The major difference that sticks out for me in your comparison is that free access to long distance calls is optional but free access to knowledge is not. A second difference is that it seemed there was a dialogue going, a dialogue during which if a similar one had happened between MIT and Aaron, MIT might have found out they were about to destroy something precious. AT&T, that well-known bastion of freedom and openness could do that. MIT apparently could not.
Finally I urge you to please watch Taren's video at the end of the linked article.
It's worth noting that for most of the twentieth century AT&T was a driving force for scientific and engineering innovation in the US, greater than most universities (though perhaps not MIT). Researchers there won seven Nobel prizes, and two Turing awards. On a more mundane note, Unix was invented there, as well as C and C++, and the photovoltaic cell.
No disrespect to AT&T's Bell Labs and its employees legendary achievements was meant or implied. I'm well aware of what they stood for. (my first unix wm was mgr...).
I think it was more than just touching, and I also think that it puts the lie to anybody that still wants to harp on the case not being the prime factor in Aarons life over the last two years as well as the reason why he choose to conclude it.
There are a number of very good questions in her address, questions that have no easy answer. Especially the ones about technology being used to improve the world, and the bit about 'magic'. After all, it really is close to magic, we wield all this power and we use it in the aggregate to sell advertising and gizmos. It's certainly food for thought for me.
Finally I urge you to please watch Taren's video at the end of the linked article.