Non-Tech Legals redefining Technology - LOL
Did the court define what passwords or keys are? Oddly, Shannon never did.
"password" is a viable password. If a unique is required "2016password" would suffice.
This problem can only be solved technologically, not legally.
In addition, legally speaking, since today's standard cryptographic systems are "juvenile" at best, with WiFi systems being trivial to breach, it is not too difficult to prove that it is impossible to secure one's own WiFi without changing the password every minute. This is the flawed judicial reasoning behind the decision. Technically, the providers of security products should be held legally liable, since they provided the security systems. Surely users cannot be responsible for faulty products.
In criminal cases, the onus of proof of liability falls on the prosecution, in civil cases on the plaintiff. Beware of future legislation where the onus of proof (disproof) will be legally preassigned to the defendant. This is to protect crap security and security corporations.
In other words, your legal rights are getting screwed to protect profits. But have no fear, a literal cryptographic shit-storm is about to hit the fan.