Seeing as the title has the word "copying" not "stealing" and at the time of this writing, the top comment is basically saying that Peak Design loses nothing from this[1], at least HN is consistent.

1: https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=26339201

The difference here is that they are selling it . Amazon isn't giving it away for free they are profiting from it

People hosting pirated material often pair it with ads.

And pirates use bulletproof hosting in other countries to avert takedowns. Amazon is in the US, where they are beholden to US laws.

Your argument is that by evading jurisdiction, an act transforms from 'theft' to 'not theft'?

No, but from "hey we can do something about this" to "hey we cannot do something about this".

Why does selling make a difference to the injured party? For example, most people who are torrenting have no interest in sales.

It would apply only if pirates were actually selling said content, which in this case Amazon Basics does in fact do.