In this case what is being circumvented is precisely what is defined by CFAA as a malicious code or information transmitted to cause intentional damage to a pro

In this case what is being circumvented is precisely what is defined by CFAA as a malicious code or information transmitted to cause intentional damage to a protected computer system, so I doubt the courts will be too upset about effectively circumventing the mechanisms of a malicious virus. > 5. (A) knowingly causes the transmission of a program, information, code, or command, and as a result of such conduct, intentionally causes damage without authorization, to a protected computer; You can file whatever copyright suit you want, you can’t go damage someone else’s data just because you’re mad. Just like a contractor has to get a lien and not just go smash up their work because they didn’t get paid.