Yeah, the real BS is the claim to reclassify software in a website as a copyrighted work. And that that ad blockers "changing/blocking" the code in the computer, hence the vague argument relying on Privacy Law -- would constitute, or so they say, as copyright infringement. Since the blocking cuts on their profits, as you did not let the copyrighted code run fully or in entirety. As doing so, would include ads and thus, revenue.

It is an absolute wild and bonkers claim with so many down current repercussion that it would redefine the entire internet if somehow it managed to win the case and become legal precedent. Clearly, the lawyers either do not care or never bother to think about it. Common sense would say that it should get thrown out of court. Is that insane.

Was discussing it with a lawyer friend and it is feasible or it could be argued by the reading of the claim, that if taken by the letter, that you blocking the java script on a site, would or could also be considered as "piracy," too.

By that same logic I could claim that SHOWING me an ad by circumventing my ad blocker is interfering with the in memory execution of my ad blocker. Wtf.

or mandate which program can be used to access the page.

like an app.