Hacker News Reader

> You're consuming the content without providing the expected revenue to the owner.

Just nitpicking here, but that does not make adblocking and copyright infringement similar. Copyright is not inherently about revenue. It's about who has legal control over the distribution of the work.

View on HN

Isn't that a difference without a distinction? All copyright infringement lawsuits are centered around the loss of revenue the infringement caused.

Not at all. The distinction is very real. Many copyright infringement lawsuits are not about the money, but are about the use of copyrighted material in a way, or by an entity, that the copyright holder doesn't approve of. They aren't upset that they weren't getting paid, they're upset at their work being used in a way they oppose.

It's also true that (outside of criminal copyright infringement) the only remedy that a court can offer is monetary. But that fact doesn't mean that money was the real issue at hand.

And to provide a concrete example: Rage Against The Machine demanded that Rush Limbaugh stop using their music on air. Because those performances were not licensed, they qualified as an illegal performance of the work. But RATM certainly didn't issue that cease and desist because they were concerned about lost revenue.

Reply on news.ycombinator.com