I base that reasoning mainly on their elevation of the free speech clause of first amendment above almost anything else in law (except maybe the second amendment). They seem to have elevated it above even the other part of the first, the establishment clause. You're correct that the government generally gives a lot of leeway to copyright holders, but that's a statutory issue, not a constitutional one. The religion thing has gotten even more complex in the last year after the court redefined the Religious Freedom Restoration Act to include disregarding basic laws as protected speech (even in the case where your speech isn't infringed, but only your conscience). I do, however, love when two issues collide to expose the cognitive dissonance required to be a conservative justice these days. Somehow, Scalia is never bother by it.