Harry, you have neglected to cite all the exemptions to the anti-circumvention provision, nor did you mention that the 5th circuit federal court has already ruled that
breaking DRM when there is no violation of copyright is not enough to trigger the anti-circumvention provision of the DMCA:
"Merely bypassing a technological protection that restricts a user from viewing or using a work is insufficient to trigger the DMCA's anti-circumvention provision. The DMCA prohibits only forms of access that would violate or impinge on the protections that the Copyright Act otherwise affords copyright owners... The owner's technological measure must protect the copyrighted material against an infringement of a right that the Copyright Act protects, not from mere use or viewing."
--
http://www.ca5.uscourts.gov/opinions...21-CV0.wpd.pdf
That pretty clearly and unambiguously says to me that if you strip DRM just to read a book you're entitled to read, that's OK. If you strip DRM to get rights you shouldn't have then that's a violation.
Why are you trying to make people think that you have some first hand knowledge that this is against the law when the courts seem be saying it's not?
ApK