It's kind of a mixed bag. Ownership of someone elses work has always been a sticky subject since there is no such thing as purchasing a movie. You purchase the right to view a movie.
That is, of course, where things get very sticky.
If you buy a movie, then rip that movie, so you can stream it to any TV/PC in your home, then I know I don't see anything wrong with that. I'm not sure studios really see something blatently wrong with that... But, if I can rip what I own, then I can rip what I rent as well.
So, I expect this will be another push towards the download/stream only mentality where all content is immediately Internet verified for legal usage and individual copies are uniquely identifiable.
Pushing back the 'physical' copy to a later date after the bulk of profitable rentals occur is a very real possibility in upcoming years I expect.
On the other hand, a nifty thing that has occurred is that the rules of HDCP have been more clearly defined for home A/V distribution in that a product which only has one HDCP key can go into a splitter/matrix switcher with multiple HDCP protected outputs and as long as that device has paid for keys across all inputs/outputs, there is no right by manufacturers to deny the video being sent to multiple displays simultaneously.
Most people had said that any such practice was illegal, but the HDCP board has approved this practice and policy so a 8x8 matrix HDMI switcher can do what installers expect as long as they follow this practice. (Extron, PureLink)
Other than making HDMI to component adapters or just stripping HDCP for a more reliable connection or to older DVI/non-HDCP devices, I see very little that will come to consumers which will take advantage of stripping HDCP in the 'practical' sense.
