> That being said, it doesn't follow that it would make it illegal for any technology or any consumer to alter a website page appearance. I think the page owne

> That being said, it doesn't follow that it would make it illegal for any technology or any consumer to alter a website page appearance. I think the page owners tried to argue that the page presented to the viewer was a single creative work / piece of art and that the ad blockers where defacing/misrepresenting that piece of art . As I understand the court basically decided that the final composition of the page lacked an overreaching creative process required to qualify. > The HTML on a page should be automatically copyrighted to the author already. <html> . Take that internet I own you now.