The Vice article appears to be equating circumventing DRM with white hat testing. Which is wrong, because DRM is generally understood to protect digital content.<p>Understanding how some software artifact works so you can discover flaws in its implementation does not usually require circumventing DRM. This is what I suspect the author of the Vice article does not understand.<p>Below is what the EFF had to say about this aspect of the recently leaked TPP doc.<p>&quot;One of the scariest parts of the TPP is that not only can you be made liable to fines and criminal penalties, but that any materials and implements used in the creation of infringing copies can also be destroyed (QQ.H.4(12)). The same applies to devices and products used for circumventing DRM or removing rights management information (QQ.H.4(17)). Because multi-use devices such as computers are used for a diverse range of purposes, this is once again a disproportionate penalty. This could lead to a family&#x27;s home computer becoming seized simply because of its use in sharing files online, or for ripping Blu-Ray movies to a media center.&quot;<p><a href="https:&#x2F;&#x2F;www.eff.org&#x2F;deeplinks&#x2F;2015&#x2F;10&#x2F;final-leaked-tpp-text-all-we-feared" rel="nofollow">https:&#x2F;&#x2F;www.eff.org&#x2F;deeplinks&#x2F;2015&#x2F;10&#x2F;final-leaked-tpp-text-...</a>