I guess until it's tested in court (and IANAL etc etc), it does kind of circumvent it albeit indirectly.
Since the tool's main functionality is to watch copyrighted material I guess it does circumvent access controls by tapping into an illegal repository of movies with copyright already removed (e.g. torrents).
Maybe this would be akin to telling a friend to lockpick a neighbor's door so that you can go inside. You are not directly circumventing the lock in the door but are actually doing so indirectly, by asking someone else to do it for you. Kind of like breaking the spirit (intended use) of the lock. I mean, the analogy is probably full of holes but I'm just using it to illustrate the point.
