Whom to ask?

In late with a small axe to grind ;-) tldr; just because someone is an expert in one thing, or in a position of authority/leadership doesn't mean they have super-human intelligence or omniscience, no one knows everything and everyone makes mistakes, so when questioning authority the _dumbest_ answer is most likely the correct one. Just put yourself in their shoes and think of the mistakes you'd make in their position.

> It's a little hard to tell whether it was always supposed to not apply to hobbyist developers and they just made this more explicit, or they hadn't considered it at all

These laws appear to be written in good faith, unlike a lot of US law written by some industry group for private advantage sneaking a fast one past the other legislators, and the people who write them _aren't_ _any_ _smarter_ than anyone else, they may have specific experience and training in the law but they are not omniscient gods. Kind of like the tendency to anthropomorphize LLMs, even well-meaning savvy people tend toward an underlying assumption that legislators and people at top of government know vastly more than they do and are making some sort of 9-dimentional chess moves that we can barely understand or interpret without the help of a priesthood of media pundits, when the fact is they probably just didn't think of it. In this case the draft law was put together with what they knew and had experience in and they relied on good-faith feedback to, loudly, tell them all the detail they missed, all the effects they forgot when drafting. Does anyone really thing that a human person could mentally keep track of all the effects and second-order consequences of even a 5-10 page law, it takes teams of people and the public reviewing it form their subject-matter-expert perspective to find the bad feedback loops and holes to shave off the worst of the potential negative consequences when changing societies rules.