Is that really the case? Judges shut down some loopholes or 'hacks', but then others are allowed as being perfectly acceptable. The rational that decides when

Is that really the case? Judges shut down some loopholes or 'hacks', but then others are allowed as being perfectly acceptable. The rational that decides when one is allowed and one is not seems to be a second level to the hacking. You can't just exploit the law, but find a way to ensure the exploitation is ruled valid. Given judges are people, it does make it more 'squishy' than things on the tech side. Hacks have to appear clever but not insulting, and sometimes you have to fish for the right judge or court to support you, but that is all just the social engineering part of the hacking.