German Court rules that ad-blocking is legal

[Cuzza]

Source: https://adblockplus.org/blog/restating-the-obvious-adblocking-declared-legal

"The Hamburg judge ruled against the plaintiffs and in favor of Adblock Plus, upholding the right of Adblock Plus users everywhere to continue to block annoying ads and protect their privacy"

[orangecat]

Good.

[Dzzope]

Source: https://adblockplus.org/blog/restating-the-obvious-adblocking-declared-legal

"The Hamburg judge ruled against the plaintiffs and in favor of Adblock Plus, upholding the right of Adblock Plus users everywhere to continue to block annoying ads and protect their privacy"

Well, not everywhere.. Just anywhere within the courts jurisdiction.

[Albatross]

Good for you Germany, for not doing what I expected you to do.

 

 

Well, not everywhere.. Just anywhere within the courts jurisdiction.

 

What? Really? Then this is no victory...

[nhatduy1611]

Most of the ad around the internet are malware or virus anyways. 

[FloRolf]

Next stop: Kill GEMA.

[ShadowCaptain]

Kind of agree that its not illegal, but I still dont like it

[Ertman]

Glad to hear. This makes sense. This does not negate terms of use agreements that might require the disabling of ad blocking software.

What? Really? Then this is no victory...

Yes it is. Did you expect a German court ruling to be enforced internationally?

[slightlyjaded]

Just another company protecting it's own interests. Adblock has been in the news recently by offering a premium service for advertisers to bypass adblock's screening, a "whitelist" if you will..... So basically this court decision backs adblock's business interests while blocking another company's within this court's slightly limited domain.....Yay adblock.

 

I thought It'd be better to provide at least one reference rather than be that guys that said that thing....

 

http://arstechnica.com/business/2015/02/over-300-businesses-now-whitelisted-on-adblock-plus-10-pay-to-play/

Edited April 22, 2015 by slightlyjaded

[SatansHollow]

I agree with this. Users should be allowed to choose.

[Brughc]

It doesn't really say why the judge favored Adblock. Why isn't it illegal?. I would like to know...

[Dzzope]

What? Really? Then this is no victory...

A German court has no effect on Laws / policies or anything else in say the US, Canada, Australia, China.. basically anywhere other than Germany (Perhaps EU, but this was a German court and not an EU one so...)

[Sakkura]

Just another company protecting it's own interests. Adblock has been in the news recently by offering a premium service for advertisers to bypass adblock's screening, a "whitelist" if you will..... So basically this court decision backs adblock's business interests while blocking another company's within this court's slightly limited domain.....Yay adblock.

 

I thought It'd be better to provide at least one reference rather than be that guys that said that thing....

 

http://arstechnica.com/business/2015/02/over-300-businesses-now-whitelisted-on-adblock-plus-10-pay-to-play/

 

Blocking ads should be legal. But extorting money for letting ads bypass an adblocker is a dubious business practice. That's just not what this trial was about.

[FatalityDiablo]

Wow, what a blessing - now I can use adblock without any internal conflicts haunting me in my dreams....

[Dzzope]

Glad to hear. This makes sense. This does not negate terms of use agreements that might require the disabling of ad blocking software.

Also this... There are many sites that disable content if they detect the use of ad-blocking software.. If the ad revenue is so important then it's easy to add this in.. Not that ads pay that much unless they are clicked.. and who clicks them really...

[slightlyjaded]

Blocking ads should be legal. But extorting money for letting ads bypass an adblocker is a dubious business practice. That's just not what this trial was about.

I agree, merely stating that a news article found on the company's own website is probably going to present said company in a somewhat favorable light while not mentioning their somewhat shady business practices elsewhere.

 

This is a regional german court. It's the equivalent of a judge in bumfuck idaho saying it's perfectly legal to marry your sister. (and yes that probably warrants my first strike, sorry to anyone living in idaho)

[Dzzope]

Blocking ads should be legal. But extorting money for letting ads bypass an adblocker is a dubious business practice. That's just not what this trial was about.

I don't like ads.. But why should it be legal to block them.. people pay to put them there.. You can't block ads on TV, Radio, Billboards, why should the net be different?

Your (generally people on net, not you per say) using someones service that is provided for free as they can earn revenue through ads.. By blocking them your cutting off their revenue and may make the service nonviable.

 

I for one would prefer ads to no service from some places.. Though there should be a limit and tighter controls on ads IMO.

[slightlyjaded]

I don't like ads.. But why should it be legal to block them.. people pay to put them there.. You can't block ads on TV, Radio, Billboards, why should the net be different?

Your (generally people on net, not you per say) using someones service that is provided for free as they can earn revenue through ads.. By blocking them your cutting off their revenue and may make the service nonviable.

 

I for one would prefer ads to no service from some places.. Though there should be a limit and tighter controls on ads IMO.

You you push the skip ad button on youtube?

[Sakkura]

I agree, merely stating that a news article found on the company's own website is probably going to present said company in a somewhat favorable light while not mentioning their somewhat shady business practices elsewhere.

 

This is a regional german court. It's the equivalent of a judge in bumfuck idaho saying it's perfectly legal to marry your sister. (and yes that probably warrants my first strike, sorry to anyone living in idaho)

 

Here's a third-party article. Pretty clear that the plaintiff's argument was bogus and was shot down by the court. It's possible that a higher court would rule differently, but it doesn't seem likely.

[Sakkura]

I don't like ads.. But why should it be legal to block them.. people pay to put them there.. You can't block ads on TV, Radio, Billboards, why should the net be different?

Your (generally people on net, not you per say) using someones service that is provided for free as they can earn revenue through ads.. By blocking them your cutting off their revenue and may make the service nonviable.

 

I for one would prefer ads to no service from some places.. Though there should be a limit and tighter controls on ads IMO.

 

You can block ads on TV and radio all you like. And billboard ads are banned in many areas.

[Dzzope]

You you push the skip ad button on youtube?

yes but there are other ads on youtube.. If it was the only one I wouldn't.

[slightlyjaded]

Here's a third-party article. Pretty clear that the plaintiff's argument was bogus and was shot down by the court. It's possible that a higher court would rule differently, but it doesn't seem likely.

Fair call. The plaintiff argued blocking the adds was illegal because it modified the site. Adblock just pointed out (rightly) that it wasn't modifying the site, merely the feed into the clients computer (at their request)

[Dzzope]

You can block ads on TV and radio all you like. And billboard ads are banned in many areas.

You can't block TV ads.. you can turn the station over but not block them. Bilboards are very common in some places and not in others.. Thats my point about controlling how many and the content the ads hold.. There needs to be better regulation over ads and their content IMO... But then your getting into net freedoms and such.

[Albatross]

A German court has no effect on Laws / policies or anything else in say the US, Canada, Australia, China.. basically anywhere other than Germany (Perhaps EU, but this was a German court and not an EU one so...)

 

 

Glad to hear. This makes sense. This does not negate terms of use agreements that might require the disabling of ad blocking software.

Yes it is. Did you expect a German court ruling to be enforced internationally?

 

No, of course I don't expect German law to work internationally. I have horribly misunderstood what was said. I thought it meant certain parts of Germany only, not the entire country. Sorry for the misunderstanding, I haven't had sleep in four days. Carry on please. :blush:

[flibberdipper]

Good. I'll allow ads on sites I care about (aka, LTT, JTC (if he even has any), my own shit, and YouTube). Everyone else can bite me.