I don't think it's about ageism, but about the pace of technology. Many (if not all?) of the concepts being debated were likely invented after most current judges were born: the internet; HTTP; web scraping; browsers. It's not easy to understand something you've not spent much time learning about. And the rule book on laws regarding the internet is not fully written yet.
How much do you think the average 25 year old knows about networking protocols, HTTP, and web scraping--much less how those areas intersect with legal precedent and practice? Especially given (maybe barring patent and technology-related IP lawyers) they probably have a liberal arts undergrad degree of some sort.
>And the rule book on laws regarding the internet is not fully written yet.
Yes, it is certainly true that there's a lot of technology-related law which is pretty unsettled relative to areas of law like contracts and property that have at least centuries of jurisprudence behind them.
ADDED: And one last thing I'd add to the last point is that, when technical people complain about judges (or whoever) not understanding technology when they make some decision, at least some of the time, they understand perfectly well but the existing laws don't lead to the outcome that the technical people want.
Although it sometimes can seem like they do, courts don't usually just make up things out of whole cloth to get the result they personally think is best.
