[brightlancer]

> Someone who installs this extension doesn't in my mind qualify to be defrauding anyone.

Bluntly, it doesn't matter what you or I think -- what matters is what politicians, police, prosecutors and judges think.

I don't see anything on the main github page that says the extension is intended to cause harm to the advertisers or the website, but IME governments have often not cared.

And when 1M people in a country install the extension, are they acting independently or as a group? One person protesting may be legal, 1M organizing may not be protected.

[nradov]

Stop being vague. Which specific law do you think that might violate. Provide a citation.

[ac29]

The U.S. Department of Justice Criminal Resource Manual Section 941.18 U.S.C. 1343 cites these as the key elements of wire fraud: “1) that the defendant voluntarily and intentionally devised or participated in a scheme to defraud another out of money; 2) that the defendant did so with the intent to defraud; 3) that it was reasonably foreseeable that interstate wire communications would be used; and 4) that interstate wire communications were in fact used.”

[nradov]

You have completely misunderstood the wire fraud statute. It isn't even remotely applicable here. Come on. Read the case law.

[brokenmachine]

Since the ad agencies are the ones benefiting monetarily from this alleged fraud, would that not mean that they would be bringing about a case against themselves?