I don't see how that clarifies anything; what effect does a measure that's been circumvented have, and how does it differ from the effect of a message of "dibs" that some people decide to abide by?
Okay, so how is my access controlled if I circumvent the measure? And how does that not apply equally well to me just being told in a "technical" way not to access something?
In the same way that you are still trespassing even if you can easily step over a fence saying "no entry". Try going to a judge and saying "well the sign lied, because yes I was able to entry when it said I shouldn't be able to"
Crimes are not based on technicalities, they are based on intent. The environment put up resistance and signs to let you know it was trying to effectively control your access. You just willfully ignored them and stepped over the fence anyway.
Exactly. A judge will not interpret the law as only outlawing what is impossible.
And the law does provide a definition:
> a technological measure “effectively controls access to a work” if the measure, in the ordinary course of its operation, requires the application of information, or a process or a treatment, with the authority of the copyright owner, to gain access to the work.
This is just continuing to move the question into new language that's not any less obtuse; if the game comes on a cartridge and I need to copy it onto a computer to put in an emulator, and the game's loading screen tells me not to, how is this not "a process" that doesn't have "the authority of the copyright owner" even if it's not encrypted in any way? Even more preposterously, if the game tells me I can only play on Tuesdays, and when it boots up it gives me a prompt saying "press A to continue if it's Tuesday, but if it's not, shut down the console and wait until Tuesday", and I ignore that and press A on Wednesday, how am I not performing a process (pressing A) without the authority of the copyright owner (who only gave me permission on Tuesdays)?
Sure, I don't actually think that my arguments would actually hold up in court, but that's kind of my point; the law is written very poorly, which means that the _actual_ legal effect is not nearly as clear to a lay person as the original comment I was responding to was arguing. I alluded to this in my second paragraph in my comment, but I guess I could have been more explicit.
Courts have clarified that bypassing it "without the authority of the copyright owner" means the authority to access the work despite the technological protection measure. By default you can't access it without bypassing the measure.
Repeating from another subthread: if the game tells me I can only play on Tuesdays, and when it boots up it gives me a prompt saying "press A to continue if it's Tuesday, but if it's not, shut down the console and wait until Tuesday", and I ignore that and press A on Wednesday, how am I not bypassing a technical measure (requiring an input electronically to the console) without the authority of the copyright owner (who only gave me permission do to so on Tuesdays)?
