From the limited excerpts here, I read the "and this is protected by law" to mean that the rights of the publisher to use DRM is protected by law.
In the US, Apple can try to kill all the iPhone/iPad/iPod jailbreak efforts they want, but new JBs aren't considered as DMCA circumvention acts, even though Apple fought vigorously to try to get that in. I think it's the same here.
In other words, the copyright holder's attempt to protect his content using DRM is protected by law. However, a media owner's rights to make copies is also protected by law.
If the content owner makes the DRM so tough to circumvent that it's impossible to make a copy, then at that point the government needs to be notified.