Apple lawyers clearly think it does.

Part of their legal argument is that the tool doesn't have valid uses.

Apple lawyers are expensive and know what they are doing. They think that bringing this up will increase their chances of winning the lawsuit.

Therefore it's perfectly valid to point out that their argument is BS.

> Part of their legal argument is that the tool doesn't have valid uses.

The tool has many valid uses. You’re not going to hear about them from Apple, though.

I think it is entirely naive and optimistic to think that Apple's lawyers aren't perfectly capable of framing things in the best light, even when their goals (or even a subset of them) may be less favorable.