>>13048I never understood the argument on
>"circumventing technological protection measures"It seems to require an extreme subjective bias to see it that way.
Consider other perspectives.
What if somebody buys a Snitch because they see it as a Japanese puzzle box, and their fun is solving the technological puzzle. You're gonna criminalize playing the wrong way with a toy ?
From the perspective of consoomers who actually try to game on this thing, it's just malware, a defect, or a personal property circumvention measure.
It feels like somebody legislated extreme anti consumer bias into law. The fundamental legal argument for having any kind of Intellectual monopolies at all, is that it's in the public interest. How does the general public benefit from having their personal property expropriated ?
If they went back to games cartridges, like in the olden days and each cartridge had a special ASIC chip specifically optimized to run a particular game. They would have a legit case, because there would be a benefit for consumers as well. Asic cartridges could be super power efficient and make the battery last a long time, while also ensuring that games never stutter. And the base compute device could be cheaper because heavy duty processing gets offloaded to the cartridge chip. And they could hold on to their scarcity business model.