That being said, I realize Dropbox(or Corporate entities in general) is not government and/or legal system and it is not required of them to follow laws, which are applicable for governments.
However, Laws are legal representation of morals/ethics, which are applicable for every entity in the society, for its effective operation.
While the law is codified as Presumption of Innocence, its underlying sentiment, from moral point-of-view, Judge/punish based on definitive actions not speculations, are applicable for all entities of the society.
Not only are you not a lawyer, but you are also struggling with some basic concepts regarding the implementation of laws.
Laws, implemented as statutes, have no association with, or bearing on, morals which are purely a cultural phenomena.
I understand that you disagree with how Dropbox went about protecting themselves from civil liability, however the violated no laws by their actions.
I absolutely do not disagree with how Dropbox went about protecting themselves. What I disagree with is, trying to claim a tool or technology can be anti-law, rather than its usage.
All pieces of technology, from Atom energy to Internet, can be used for both wonderfully good or evil. What I am trying to say is, Laws are (should be) applied how a technology is used, not what technology is used.
That being said, I am not trying to defend or endorse dropship's reverse-engineering of Dropbox's proprietary code, and hence infringing the ToS. It certainly looks illegal.
> however the violated no laws by their actions.
Never disagreed.
Additionally, you're conflating society, which is comprised of a group of people, with culture, which is a product of a group of people that aren't necessarily members of the same society.
Christian culture defines a moral code by which they measure themselves. That culture is present in many societies and can influence (or not) the societal debate on governance (witness the current California constitutional ban on Gay Marriage as an example).
That leads to people who are culturally opposed to laws enacted by the society in which they happen to live.
Laws are enacted by the constituents of a nation-state as a means of defining roles, rights, and remedies. The process by which they are proposed, debated, and enacted is internally consistent but varies between governing bodies.
If you re-phrase whatever point you were trying to make by consistently using words with meanings we can agree on, then maybe we'll have something to disagree about.
Courts have upheld these terms of service/use agreements in many cases; just googling ProCD v. Zeidenberg will give you more information, if you're interested.
For example, the government has no right to privacy whilst we as individuals do.
Can dropshiip be used for illegal fire sharing? YES, in fact, that was the suggested and intended use. Under American case law, which governs Dropbox, that alone is enough to constitute a DMCA violation (see, e.g. Napster, Kazaa, and succeeding cases).
Dropbox took dropship down to prevent future legal issues. Since it's their service, they don't have to wait until they occur actual legal liability to act.