IMHO it is a worthwhile discussion, but not according to @dang's understanding of HN:
> HN is not a site for discussing legal matters per se, but only the ones that gratify intellectual curiosity, and only to the extent that they do. That is what we're optimizing for here.
Taken at face value, it is unclear if this particular discussion "gratifies intellectual curiosity"
This is less a discussion of the law it self and more a discussion on whether actively breaking laws directly on HN is acceptable. Framing it properly makes it much broader than simply a discussion on this particular law.
> HN is not a site for discussing legal matters per se, but only the ones that gratify intellectual curiosity, and only to the extent that they do. That is what we're optimizing for here.
Taken at face value, it is unclear if this particular discussion "gratifies intellectual curiosity"
https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=20620430