No, you keep parroting it because it's the internet equivalent of sticking your fingers in your ears and yelling "lalala! I can't hear you" when faced with something that contradicts what you've blindly bought into.
You avoid the implications, be it legal or financial, to all parties involved because you haven't considered them and the mere possibility of them contradicts that narrow little view of the law you have which has the legal position fall neatly into a simple "yes/no now and forever" bucket you've convinced yourself exists. Law is seldom, if ever, so clean cut and is in itself a constantly evolving mess of contradicting legislation that is constantly tested and challenged. Hell, even the laws you're trying to hang off are nuanced and nowhere near as clear cut as you'd like to believe - just the right to backup your games has caveats and varies wildly across different countries.
Remind us all, how did the makers of Bleem fare from that legal battle?... where is Bleem today? I notice that while you're eager to cite them as a point in your favor, you avoid the ultimate outcome of that battle and a point I've already made and which you've tried to dismiss as "FUD". The legal battle killed them. But like I said, you have your head in the sand and don't have any grasp of the subject or implications. Bleem got popular, Bleem went mainstream, Bleem got hit with legal action, Bleem died. And all the while there were ignorant fools like yourself telling everyone that the threat is all just "FUD" (the 90's equivalent escapes me) and later trying to console themselves with the "Win" that resulted in the death of the emulator, the fall of the company behind it, and set emulation back into the shadows for years to come.
This is what winning looks like:
Oh... and they had to change that image shortly after posting it to their website for fear of further legal action.