What they did was despicable but that's not really fair either. If defective aluminum they sold was direct cause of 2 billion bridge collapse would they be liable for that amount?
Put yourself on the other side. Someone breaks into your house, steals a painting and pawns it off for $500. Unbeknownst to them, it was worth $10,000. Breaking in, they broke a window. Unbeknownst to them, you're traveling, and that leads to $50,000 in flood damage. Guess who is liable: the crook or you?
It might be unfair that they took on a $60,000 liability for $500 worth of gain, but it's far more fair than if you took on a $60,000 liability.
Base damages are usually the greater of the damages caused to the victim and the gains to the culprit. There are exceptions (treble damages, statutory damages, etc.), but that's a fine baseline.
