If the law where clear cut, yes. When the law is uncertain, it's not possible to either fully comply, or fully violate the law - avoiding "being caught" prevent

If the law where clear cut, yes. When the law is uncertain, it's not possible to either fully comply, or fully violate the law - avoiding "being caught" prevents legal action on an issue that may or may not be legal. That this is possible/necessary is due to the structure of the legal system. What intensives have people to risk being a legal test case? It's clear to me those with influence over the law purposefully keep things ambiguous in order to have it both ways (threaten, without risk of being threatened) - maybe the opposing sides should be able to take advantage of the ambiguity just as much - after all, privacy is the right even of those with nothing to hide.