> there are few laws which seem more universally opposed by the open source community, and seems to me quite at odds with the values of FOSS - as is any DRM sch

> there are few laws which seem more universally opposed by the open source community, and seems to me quite at odds with the values of FOSS - as is any DRM scheme. My reading is that this is obviously a half-serious and half-sarcastic remark. The serious message is that the author believes it's a genuine case of copyright violation. The sarcastic message is that - given the context that the bar of invoking DMCA is so low that almost every trivial check can be classified as "anti-circumvention devices" (including the GPL symbol check in the Linux kernel), making it universally opposed by the FOSS community - Thus, the author thought it would be fun to flip the table here to make the exact same legal threat back to proprietary software vendors. It's simultaneously a copyright infringement accusation, a sarcastic comment on the excessively broad scope of DMCA, and a half-serious revenge in the form of a hypothetical legal threat. It reminds me of a song about cryptography called Alice and Bob, which made a similar joke. The lyrics read: > Sending data across the network in a safe way > Protecting messages to make my pay > If you hack me you're guilty under the DMCA The joke of the song is that proprietary software vendors often use DMCA to suppress vulnerability disclosure from security researchers, thus, a security researcher who implements an insecure data encryption protocol can theoretically make use of the same legal threat to cover up their own incompetence - which is absurd from a technical perspective but also the point of the joke.