That's not true because it doesn't make sense.
It doesn't have to make sense, like someone said, welcome to Crazy Law Town. You have two laws that appear conflicting. On the one hand, you are allowed to make a personal backup copy. On the other, you are not allowed to circumvent copy protection. Until someone gets hauled into court and the case tested, we don't know what the legality is.
In Canada, under the new 2012 copyright act, time shifting (ie taping TV broadcasts) is now officially legal, as is format shifting. Yes, until then, it's been a grey area, despite VCR technology being decades old. However, even these time- and format-shifting exceptions do not apply if access- or copy-control is broken. Yay? So now we can legally move songs purchased on iTunes from computer to iPod.
Nonsensical? Boneheaded? Yes. Even the politicians passing this law themselves said "it is unrealistic a content creator would sue a consumer over this (circumvention for personal use) due to cost and time involved". So they admit this is a stupid law, and people should just go ahead and break this law because one one's likely to be sued for it. It's also legal to possess tools and software that can be used to circumvent protection.
Does this fill you with confidence yet?