Exactly this. You can hold that the current copyright system is good and fine. That's a moral position that is, in my view, entirely deluded but internally cons

Exactly this. You can hold that the current copyright system is good and fine. That's a moral position that is, in my view, entirely deluded but internally consistent and not really worth having a discussion about. People who conclude that look at the world through a fundamentally incompatible lense for discussions between the other set to be productive. Or you can (correctly) think it's a huge drag on innovation and human progress. If you think the latter then hoping in this case for legal precedent to broaden the scope of copyright enforcement is just bizarre logic. This isn't a rule that already exists as such. The case will set a precedent (based on interpretation of existing law) for the future.