Some people are refusing to pay Amazon (or other providers) for DRMd content - a boycott of anything with DRM.
Some people are not going to break any laws, even if those laws are mostly technical and not going to be enforced. And providing means to remove DRM is more problematic because the law is enforced a bit more rigorously there.
I am coming to a similar opinion with respect to the music and movie industries. For example, there are a few long since syndicated and no longer frequently broadcast TV shows that I and my family would gladly pay for. But there is no option to do so. We have purchased a few others, to be greatly disappointed when we found all the music changed, in cases where the music was closely tied into the plot.
Every item I purchase from these content owners contributes to the efforts they are making including to privatize and balkanize the Internet. Therefore, I will no longer spend my money in a fashion that contributes to this.
A fellow in... France, I believe, wrote a very pointed and eloquent article/post on precisely this point, some months back.
It is not. Section 1201 of the DMCA specifiys:
"No person shall circumvent a technological measure that effectively controls access to a work protected under this title."
There is an exception to users whose ability to make legal use of the protected material is impeded, but only after the Librarian of Congress rules that the given type of user of the given type of work qualifies for the above exception.
The exception mentioned above also, explicitly, does not apply to the following provision:
"No person shall manufacture, import, offer to the public, provide, or otherwise traffic in any technology, product, service, device, component, or part thereof, that--
`(A) is primarily designed or produced for the purpose of circumventing a technological measure that effectively controls access to a work protected under this title;
`(B) has only limited commercially significant purpose or use other than to circumvent a technological measure that effectively controls access to a work protected under this title; or
`(C) is marketed by that person or another acting in concert with that person with that person's knowledge for use in circumventing a technological measure that effectively controls access to a work protected under this title."
Some people are not going to break any laws, even if those laws are mostly technical and not going to be enforced. And providing means to remove DRM is more problematic because the law is enforced a bit more rigorously there.