I think stealing is always wrong, but there may be cases in which it's the lesser evil. I'm not sure.
The example people always give is that it's okay to steal if your children are starving. In advanced countries, though, it's always possible to feed your children without stealing. In countries where poverty is so severe that you really have to steal to feed your children, your theft may well doom your neighbor's children to starvation.
Theft is a problem where I work. The students justify their theft by saying that (a) the owner can afford the loss and (b) they're paying tuition, so they're entitled. In fact, though, the owner is going to charge whatever he needs to charge to run the school at a profit, and the price of stolen items doesn't come directly out of his pocket. It's passed on to students and clients. As for the tuition, what they've paid for doesn't include the items they steal. I can't go into Best Buy and say, "I bought a television here once, so I'm entitled to take a few movies."
When you steal from a large corporation, the harm to any individual employee or customer might be negligible, but the cumulative effect of such theft is not. You are part of a very big problem.
Frankly, I think rationalizing theft is as contemptible as the theft itself. The right of conquest -- "I wanted it, so I stole it" -- may not be very convincing as morality, but at least it's honest.