Software is one thing because it deals with the inane IP laws. But in the US we have a long established English common law policy called first sale. Which is that the seller of a product has no control over the product after it's sold. They can write a EULA and demand all sorts of things but none of it's enforceable on the hardware and it's use. Under US laws for them to even charge in a lawsuit that it involves theft of computer services they are arguing (again under US law) that they own the computer in question because you can only steal computer services from someone else.
It's an astounding argument, in fact of all the charges they put in the lawsuit only one IMO came close to even a valid argument and that was that it was a DMCA violation to circumvent the encryption. In this case the DMCA violation is specifically allowed by the DMCA when seeking to implement interoperability with another software program or standard.
So out half a dozen charges in the lawsuit only one was even close to valid. They threw everything they could at it and some of them were blatant misinterpretations of the law. I'd personally like to see a change in the US legal system where if a plaintiff makes a charge in a lawsuit proven to be so obviously without merit that the entire lawsuit is dismissed. It's immensely dirty and immoral to make a claim of theft of computer services in this case.