Whether ‘tis nobler to abide by a law out of sync with technology or to take arms against a sea of troubles, that is the question for the common user of the Internet who desires content at the lowest price point, instantaneously and within some framework of economic fairness and personal ethics.
I think the same principle applies to internet sites. Members of a community (nation, state, book group, dining club, whatever) have a responsibility to criticize and suggest alternatives to things they find problematic, whether those are government principles, media representations, website policies, or laws. In fact, this is such a cultural norm that the right to protest is enshrined in the European Convention on Human Rights, the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights and the US Constitution. Yes, websites (and media products in general) are run by private companies rather than civic institutions, but they influence society just as laws and government policies do. And there’s a very long history of citizens protesting immoral or unethical corporate behavior, from The Jungle to the DRM protests. It sounds a bit silly to argue “if you don’t like canned food that may or may not be full of botulism or e-coli, don’t eat it.”