[AnotherCat]

Just for the sake of good order; the infringing of copyright is not "theft" as some here are stating (at least in the USA, where it has been tested, and in my own country, and I suspect many other places too).

The use of the word 'theft" is an emotionally driven one, most often used by those who have a particular axe of their own to grind, and does nothing to describe the true circumstance which is that copyright infringement is an invasion of rights--nothing is stolen (nor has there been fraud as is also sometimes claimed).

Regarding the lawfulness of removing DRM from books it is almost certainly lawful in my own country (as is the removal of technological protection measures on other media such as movies) as long as it is for the purpose of using the work for non-infringing purposes (such as reading the book, or watching the movie oneself). I say "almost certainly" because it has not been tested for books as far as I know, but the legislation is so specific that circumvention of technological protection of movies is given in the legislation as an example of what is allowable.

So one must take care when making sweeping statements about what is legal or not, or who are "scumbags" or not as it very much depends as to where in the world they are and what the actual law is.

One is also allowed to make a personal copy of a work here (as in many places) unless one has entered into a specific contract with the supplier not to do so (say in the terms of sale - in which case I doubt whether anyone would care or think it worthwhile to take action on the copying of a low value item such as an ebook) so to make a DRM free copy in my own country for personal use across ones multiple devices almost certainly is not an infringement of copyright.