There was a recent court case about circumventing DRM in order to use a product legally being legal. Here is an article about it.
With that ruling, it might actually be completely legal for somebody to hack SC2 so that it is playable without the re-registering every 30 days. You purchased the right to play the game and so breaking the DRM in order to do so isn't actually breaking any law. Now you would likely still be breaking the TOS with Blizzard which is another can of worms and might allow them to no longer support you for online play or who knows what else.
In terms of the law though...it might be legal now to bypass the re-registering. I say might cause you never know how much the writers of an article are reading into the specifics of what happened in a court case. Some lawyers will argue it applying to one extent while others might argue it applying to another more limited extent. So there are clearly more details to be worked out here and clarification to be had. I find it interesting though that it at least opens the door to the possibility of it being completely legal to by-pass DRM like the 30 day re-register requirement.
If some more of these court cases come up and up-hold this interpretation then it makes one wonder if companies might stop putting these annoyances into their software. Before it was considered illegal to break DRM for any purpose. Now it is a much more grey area. So the more clearly legal it gets the less useful it may be for companies to bother in the first place.
Just an interesting slightly side topic for discussion.
With that ruling, it might actually be completely legal for somebody to hack SC2 so that it is playable without the re-registering every 30 days. You purchased the right to play the game and so breaking the DRM in order to do so isn't actually breaking any law. Now you would likely still be breaking the TOS with Blizzard which is another can of worms and might allow them to no longer support you for online play or who knows what else.
In terms of the law though...it might be legal now to bypass the re-registering. I say might cause you never know how much the writers of an article are reading into the specifics of what happened in a court case. Some lawyers will argue it applying to one extent while others might argue it applying to another more limited extent. So there are clearly more details to be worked out here and clarification to be had. I find it interesting though that it at least opens the door to the possibility of it being completely legal to by-pass DRM like the 30 day re-register requirement.
If some more of these court cases come up and up-hold this interpretation then it makes one wonder if companies might stop putting these annoyances into their software. Before it was considered illegal to break DRM for any purpose. Now it is a much more grey area. So the more clearly legal it gets the less useful it may be for companies to bother in the first place.
Just an interesting slightly side topic for discussion.