> I don't care about that level of penny-ante pedantry. That's turns every forum into hyper-correctionalist tedium. And I don't care for sloppy thinking. It le

> I don't care about that level of penny-ante pedantry. That's turns every forum into hyper-correctionalist tedium. And I don't care for sloppy thinking. It leads to all kinds of bad conclusions. > As I already quoted, the DMCA DRM clause holds even when there is no copyright infringement. The reason for this is still to protect copyright. Only because the law is so intrusive as to criminalise the step preceding a potential copyright infringement does not change that that is the rationale behind it! [1] [2] The goal is to simplify enforcement for copyright holders. That under the DMCA, copyright owners do not need to prove that actual infringement occurred, but only need to demonstrate that circumvention of access controls took place, lowers the burden of proof for copyright owners and allows them to take action more swiftly against potential copyright violations. [3] "If someone breaks the technologies used to protect against copyright infringement the copyright owner need not prove that an infringement took place; all the owner needs to prove is that a violation of the Anti-Circumvention provisions occurred". > We have an artificial scarcity of nuclear weapons too. Just not due to intellectual property laws. And? [1] https://en.wikibooks.org/wiki/Intellectual_Property_and_the_Internet/DMCA https://en.wikibooks.org/wiki/Intellectual_Property_and_the_... [2] https://myadultattorney.com/services-item/digital-millennium-copyright-act-dmca/ https://myadultattorney.com/services-item/digital-millennium... [3] https://copyrightalliance.org/education/copyright-law-explained/the-digital-millennium-copyright-act-dmca/section-1201-technology-protection/ https://copyrightalliance.org/education/copyright-law-explai...