1. The TF forum policy seems clear. Even discussing piracy is prohibited although it seems discussing it as an abstract concept (i.e. why do people pirate - IIRC, admins thought it ALMOST crossed the line on a few occasions) does not run afoul of the policy.
2. 117a is pretty clear that the owner must modify the program in question or authorize the modification. Generally, courts don't accept retroactive authorization and most of us don't know people who crack games, and furthermore, most people who crack games probably aren't inundated with requests for the same crack pursuant to 117a.
As I tell my little girl all the time, convictions are not convenient. If you sacrifice something you believe just because you want something really badly, you don't believe it. It isn't a conviction. I wrestle with this from time to time, although as I get older, most of my convictions have turned into habits. I don't buy gas from Shell or BP. I don't watch Roman Polanski movies. There are restaurants where I won't eat because of how they treat employees or customers. There are more, but that gives you an idea. For her part, she's already beginning to understand that ethical consumption may mean sacrificing things she enjoys, like when someone treats people poorly and they're involved with a movie or book or band that you appreciate. When you find that out, you don't give them more money but that's a personal decision, not something that calls for a boycott.
My opposition to DRM is practical - I have MP3s I purchased from Yahoo!, figuring Yahoo! was big enough that I wouldn't have to worry about it ... and then Yahoo! shut down its licensing servers. It was only $10 or so, but still. Now, if I buy an MP3 (which is rare - I prefer to have the physical media like a CD or vinyl in hand), I make sure it's DRM free. And that extends to every product - I'm resistant to digital copies of anything because retrieving a hard copy from my possession typically entails breaking and entering, not remotely deleting something from a tablet or similar device.
Most of my gaming is on the console, and while I'm sure DRM exists there, it's pretty seamless. I don't see it, I'm not inconvenienced by it, etc. On my computer, it's a different story. I will often give devs money for a game I will never play, simply because they released it DRM-free. I have bought games off of GOG.com that I have yet to play and may never get around to, simply because they're new and DRM-free (FTL is fantastic, and I still haven't tried Hotline Miami but keep meaning to get to it someday).
If you believe strongly, as you seem to, that DRM is bad (and I won't disagree with that point at all - I think you and I are of like minds on that issue), then giving money to companies which include the inconveniencing, obtrusive and painful DRM that you hate only sends the message that you'll put up with it which is the opposite of what you believe.
If you also believe, as you seem to, that devs doing good work deserve to paid for it (and again, we seem to be of like minds there as well), then pirating a game you want to play but that you have not paid for is also unacceptable.
If giving a dev money reinforces their use of DRM, and pirating the game is unethical, then the only remaining option is, to borrow from "War Games," not to play.
Convictions are not convenient. If anyone ever told you they were, and I hate to be the one to say this, they lied to you. Convictions mean you sacrifice things that you want because of something you believe, because not sacrificing that thing would compromise your ethical and moral foundations and systems. It would mean that you are ideologically inconsistent, that you say one thing and do another, that you talk the talk but do not walk the walk.
And let's be blunt - you and I have gone around a few times, but while we disagree with each other on certain things, I can't say that I ever thought you were inconsistent with your words and actions. Your words and actions always seemed aligned. Until now.
So, again, I'll simply say convictions aren't convenient.
