Courts have already decided this decades ago. At least as far back as Junger v. Daley [1], where the courts recognize a distinction between the expressive power

Courts have already decided this decades ago. At least as far back as Junger v. Daley [1], where the courts recognize a distinction between the expressive power of code as it is read by a person and the functional power of code when it is executed. While the expressive power of code creates a first amendment interest, the functional power of code may create a legitimate government interest in regulating that speech. The applicable legal test is from United States v. O'Brien [2], which ruled that even though burning a draft card may be expressive speech, the government's interest in draft cards not getting burnt allows them to forbid it without falling afoul of the first amendment. Junger v. Daley was cited as precedent in Universal City Studios v. Reimerdes [3], where the courts ruled that the functional power of DeCSS being illegal under the DMCA was sufficient to justify banning the distribution of the DeCSS source code. [1] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Junger_v._Daley https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Junger_v._Daley [2] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/United_States_v._O%27Brien https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/United_States_v._O%27Brien [3] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Universal_City_Studios,_Inc._v._Reimerdes https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Universal_City_Studios,_Inc._v...