Answered: <SG5> Un-nesting, but not removing a Cone from opposing Stack legal?

I am aware that in <SG5>, it states that it is illegal to remove, deliberately or accidentally, a Cone from an opponent’s Stack and that, per the definition of Stacked, a Cone is Stacked when it is “fully nested” on a Goal or a Stacked Cone. What I’m curious about is a scenario where, for example, a Robot comes up to an opponent’s Goal with Stacked Cones on it, pushes up the bottom of the bottom-most Stacked Cone (i.e. the one sitting directly on top of the Goal) so as to render the Stack not fully nested onto the Goal (and thus not Stacked), but not entirely removing the Stack from the Goal, which then would be a clear violation of <SG5>. To clarify what I’m talking about, go to 3:07 in this video:

Note: in this video, the robot blocks the opponent from getting the cones nested in the first place. In my scenario, a robot with a device like this is pushing up the cones, un-nesting them, but not before the opponent fully nests them.

My question is, does un-nesting a Stack from an opponent’s Goal in the manner described count as a removal of Cones from that Goal per <SG5>, invoking that rule? In other words, does a partial removal of Cones from an opponent’s Goal count as a removal per <SG5>?

As soon as the Cone is not fully nested, it is no longer considered Stacked. Causing a Cone to become no longer Stacked is essentially just a different way of wording <SG5>, so yes, this would be considered a violation.

However, as you pointed out, the Robot in the video has never let the Cone become Stacked in the first place, and is thus not violating <SG5>.