This is likely to be the first game I will "obtain for free" for several years. Like you I liked AC1 and like you I was going to buy AC2 but fuck that noise, my net connection regularly goes down and I am NOT going to be denied an offline gaming experience because of it.
I hear this argument used frequently by pirates. I'm not sure that is how you intended it, but I'm going to use it as a starting point for a counter-argument.
It sounds like you are only going to justify Ubisoft's need for DRM. Just because you disagree with the copy-protection methods does not entitle you to a full copy of the game gratis.
Unless, of course, you intend to buy the game and then download a usable pirated version. That's slightly more acceptable, although that method is also counter-productive as it only encourages Ubisoft into releasing games with more DRM.
It does this in two ways: first, by reassuring them that customers will buy games with onerous copy-protection. Second, by increasing the number of pirate copies in circulation. After all, you don't really think the publishers take work-arounds like the above that into consideration when counting pirated downloads, do you? A pirated copy is a pirated copy to them, no matter if a customer actually paid for the game and is just trying to get a working product. More piracy justifies more more DRM, after all.
The only way to win this game -legally, morally and economically- is simply not to play. If you don't like the product, don't buy it, don't play it, don't do anything with it except avoid it.
DRM never justifies piracy. It definitely isn't going to "teach Ubisoft a lesson" (or if it does, they are going to learn an entirely different lesson than you intended). The only thing DRM justifies is a reason not to use that product.