As part of your still obviously ongoing defense of the Russian hackers you claimed that they couldn't have been criminal since they didn't distribute OSX, even though I showed case history of Russians being criminally prosecuted for distributing the hacks alone. I also showed Apple's letter threatening criminal prosecution, which you called "BS". You then went to other threads inferring that personal backups were "criminal", somehow instead of your Russian hacker heroes, the only law you may have been right about was when you attempted to trot out the "180 day rule for criminal prosecution" on their behalf, since you've now been defending them for just short of a year now. But all that really shows is how low you're willing to go to defend foreign hackers who cracked OSX and distributed the crack to the internet.
As I have told you, there are two laws in effect here. The NET Act would nail them for distributing OS X, and even without financial gain. The DMCA covers this, and requires financial gain for an act to be criminal. The Russian software company that you always bring up was selling the circumvention software -- financial gain. You gave no evidence the OS X hackers did it for financial gain.
when you attempted to trot out the "180 day rule for criminal prosecution" on their behalf
Which is part of the terms of the NET Act, which you take out of context.
So back to the beginning: Show me where I falsely cited the law or retract the statement.