Even more draconian are the clauses of the DMCA which make it a crime to create or distribute tools that can circumvent DRM. If you do this, you will go to jail. It is akin to the government criminalizing the production of locksmith tools, and arresting all locksmiths. Under such a scheme, what would you do if you couldn't access your car because your key has been damaged or lost? According to the MPAA or RIAA, you'd simply buy a new car (or, at the least, a new door, doorframe, etc.) Why would such crazy laws ever be passed? And who would push for them? Well, if the entertainment industry controlled the automobile production/repair industries, they might claim that without such government protection, they wouldn't be able to produce as many cars and that a massive loss of production and mechanic jobs would occur. That is the exact argument they have used to this point in authoring, lobbying for, and defending the DMCASounds ludicrous, right?
Japan has a protectionist system very similar to this. Cars older than 3 years are required to go through a very expensive inspection process each year. The cost of this process is such that it is actually cheaper to discard the old car (usually by shipping it to the Philipines) and buy a new one. The Japanese domestic electronics industry is now seeking similar protectionism. This type of protectionism is not very different from that afforded by acts such as the DMCA, or by overly permissive patent regimes.