Agreed. My concern is precisely with this conflation of Theranos's negligent misconduct with the exercise of the fundamental rights which allow us to fix our cars (if you fix your car without a shop manual, you're doing reverse engineering --- and both Chilton and Haynes do reverse engineering to write their shop manuals), fix our laptops (see Louis Rossmann), uncover Microsoft's dirty tricks to break competitors' software (reverse-engineering was crucial to the antitrust trial), preserve our information (both PDF and Word formats were reverse engineered before they were opened), use IBM-compatible PCs (the clone industry was able to launch because Phoenix reverse engineered the BIOS and wrote a cleanroom clone), and generally do anything with a manufactured device that the manufacturer didn't intend.

For this reason there are carve-outs in copyright law where something is illegal except when done for the purpose of reverse engineering; for example, in the US, you have Sega v. Accolade.