Isn't that currently legal and permissible? The precedents keep getting set in our favor (even just this week!) that ignoring terms of service on a service are

Isn't that currently legal and permissible? The precedents keep getting set in our favor (even just this week!) that ignoring terms of service on a service are not sufficient to be "hacking" or "trespassing". Practically speaking, we do see tons of people making alternative Snapchat clients or extensions, and they haven't been able to do anything to them legally... but, technologically, they keep changing their protocol slightly (which breaks older clients, but they have no issue with that; I am not sure to the extent to which they reorganize the data or merely require new and different challenges) to use shifting DRM (which makes it economically discouraged to maintain an alternative client) and then they punish users they detect using slightly non-conforming clients (putting a chilling effect on the market), and since they are also freely able to do that, there's no real hope for any of this thought process to matter. (This is similar, btw, to the issue of DRM actual being effective in the medium term and being likely to win in the long term, which is an argument I have actually had multiple times in person with Cory, as I feel he often discounts the core problem: "asymmetric encryption with cooperation from hardware vendors actually works; and, unless you make it illegal to build closed, unextensible, unrepairable systems, we are going to end up in a crypto-anarcho-capitalist dystopia".)