> Did I say or imply that breaking DRM was bad? It is a neutral description of what was done.

Well you said it's supposed to be an "alternative term". If it's valid to reword your statement as "seeding Anna's Archive is showing support for large scale DRM breaking", then everyone should be huge huge supporters of them with no downside whatsoever. Which I think is pretty different from your actual argument.

> Why? GP is arguing that as long as you're not depriving the original owner of access to the data, it can't be called stealing.

They didn't say that, they said a much simpler sentence applying to this specific context.