I don’t think people remember the days when ISPs/free wifi hotspots would inject their own ads into the content of pages served over http, or replace urls on YouTube content to show lower resolution copies of videos.
Tell that to mobile providers who can downscale my twitch and youtube videos and require premium to have higher resolution...
There are plenty of local http sites due to German's (reasonable) distrust of US companies and a propensity to roll their own
The later sounds far more plausible than an ISP trying to get sued to the ground.
"Then don't do the thing you disagree with? It's a free and open web"
"Why don't you start with agreeing with my position first?"
"Yeah, whatever, feel free to die fighting against it"
I think advocating against somethig, generating a discussion, moving the Overton window is a valid, almost necessary thing. (I admit sometimes they threaten the things I like (or me), but most of the time, it's OK.)
Perhaps "agreeing" was a bad choice of word, instead discussing, debating, or just letting me know your opinion about the matter.
Why isn't it? By navigating to a domain (or searching for it), the user is arguably making an intent statement ("I want content on $domain"). Ensuring that the user doesn't get spam, malware, etc. instead seems well within the scope of the browser.