> Either way, when you’re reading a linked page, you may still > be “at” awesomestuff.com, as clicking the back button on > your browser can instantly confirm. Effectively, > awesomestuff.com has stolen content from newyorker.com, just > as the compiler of “Most Thoughtful Essays” stole content > from me.

"At" is the wrong word. The browser is requesting content. If it's requesting content from awesomestuff.com that only newyorker.com has permission to copy, that's a copyright problem.

This is a very odd metaphor for a journalist to mistake. It's as if any reference they make in a piece is violating the copyright of the referenced item. Is reference that difficult of a concept to grasp?