Unfortunately I'm too lazy to find it, but there was a post on Medium discussing this exact question.
The reality is that the DAO was governed by the smart contract. Period. That was a very deliberate choice on the part of those who organized its genesis.
Unfortunately, the smart contract they wrote contained a bug which allowed for the ether tied up in the DAO to be taken.
If the smart contract is the contract that defines the rules by which ether in the DAO may be used, then the hacker didn't do anything illegal... they simply exploited a loophole in the contract, something that people have been doing for as long as contracts have existed.
Unfortunately I'm too lazy to find it, but there was a post on Medium discussing this exact question.
The reality is that the DAO was governed by the smart contract. Period. That was a very deliberate choice on the part of those who organized its genesis.
Unfortunately, the smart contract they wrote contained a bug which allowed for the ether tied up in the DAO to be taken.
If the smart contract is the contract that defines the rules by which ether in the DAO may be used, then the hacker didn't do anything illegal... they simply exploited a loophole in the contract, something that people have been doing for as long as contracts have existed.