What is the ruling regarding the wages of a laborer employed by a usurper to trade with usurped capital?

Primary text

The owner of the usurped property owes nothing for the laborer's wages because he did not authorize work on his property. Regarding the usurper's liability: if the laborer knew about the usurpation, he receives no wages because his action was an encroachment. If the laborer was unaware of the usurpation, the usurper owes him the fair market wage (ajr mithl) because the usurper utilized his labor for compensation that did not ultimately accrue to the laborer, making the usurper liable, similar to a void contract.