Did he cause any quantifiable harm here? Did the harm he cause ever justify that degree of punishment? My stance is no in both cases.
What is concerning to me is that some ham had to make the complaint there, maybe fully knowing the FCC would hand out a very large fine, causing him severe disruption to his family and childrens' lives, that far exceeds the nuisance caused by playing music on the radio.
Thus the ham that made the complaint is perhaps morally culpable in the excessive punishment. He acted, in conjunction with the state, to ruin this guy's (and his family's) life there. It doesn't matter if it's legal to do so, it is still morally wrong.
Fining the guy obviously causes him extreme stress, which he might end up taking out on his spouse or children afterwards, which far, far exceeds the harm from playing music on amateur radio bands. So the disproportionate punishment has knock on effects in society.
And these draconian measure are what so many hams find acceptable? I'm sure the general public doesn't though.