Human intent was ruled out. They contradict their own terms and conditions.
The terms of The DAO Creation are set forth in the smart contract code existing on the Ethereum blockchain at 0xbb9bc244d798123fde783fcc1c72d3bb8c189413. Nothing in this explanation of terms or in any other document or communication may modify or add any additional obligations or guarantees beyond those set forth in The DAO’s code. Any and all explanatory terms or descriptions are merely offered for educational purposes and do not supercede or modify the express terms of The DAO’s code set forth on the blockchain; to the extent you believe there to be any conflict or discrepancy between the descriptions offered here and the functionality of The DAO’s code at 0xbb9bc244d798123fde783fcc1c72d3bb8c189413, The DAO’s code controls and sets forth all terms of The DAO Creation.
I believe too much is being made of this clause and an attackers ability to rely on it (see further here). Just because The DAO creators purport to rule out human intent (and leave all who signed up as slaves to the code), doesn't mean a court would take the same view.
In most parts of the world, a court would also rule a simple send to a wrong address as unintentional...
And that's exactly what I don't like. We had a chance to get away from courts (or other groups) overruling clear agreements. Giving that power up now will open doors for later.
I'm not sure we can get away from courts, unless arbitration is built into these agreements/ Smart Contracts. Even then, courts are usually a weapon of last resort should one side still feel aggrieved after arbitration. The "rule of law" is a key tenant in most countries.
If we live in a nation states, that power is already ceded whether we like it or not (or even attempt to contract out of it).