Anonymous seeks to make DDoS attacks a legal form of protest

Iran isn't a valid example. In the US, EU, etc. dissent isn't met with assassination and mysterious disappearances. Calling yourself a legitimate protestor while shielding yourself from the ramifications of your own views and actions is, at best, cowardly. Extreme cases such as Iran, China, most places in Africa, and North Korea excluded of course.

The problem is that DDoS attacks cause physical damage to servers, often causing thousands of dollars worth of damage. They're right, it's not hacking. It's vandalism at best, terrorism at worst. The petition will never be taken seriously.

Can you explain to someone who doesn't know(like myself)? How would a DDoS attack become physically destructive? Are servers not designed to handle heat under stressful conditions? Are servers not design to re-boot after they have been brought to their knees?

This is what I think, if a server cannot withstand a DDoS attack it was not successfully stress tested (or stress tested at all) when initially turned on. If there is damage resulting from a DDoS attack then the damage was only inevitable, but yet now you have a specific event to point your finger at as the cause instead of looking at the true cause.

It is a valid example, and moving the goalposts to ensure your point IS valid is poor show...

A government will never sign off on an idea that will disrupt to a business. Especially if that business is putting money in their pocket. Protesting is always disruptive and will never be allowed as a legal stand point. As long as you don't disrupt the business you are usually ignored. However it is common practice as a protester to be disruptive, which is usually the only way to be seen. DDoS attacks are a way to protest but they will never become legalized.

If maintaining proper context is cheating, then I'm guilty as charged.