Is adblocking a DMCA violation?
-
Easylist, the popular AdBlock filter list has apparently been the target of a DMCA takedown notice.
Two days ago, a commit appeared in the Easylist repo on Github, removing the domain
functionalclam.comfrom Easylist, following a DMCA takedown notice filed with Github. That domain appears to be owned by US-based anti-adblocking company Admiral who claims that publishers have lost $13.4 Billion so far this year, due to AdBlock.According to a comment on EasyList's Github repo,
functionalclam.comis not actually an ad server but is part of Admiral's "copyright access control platform" that they provide to publishers. Admiral claims that blockingfunctionalclam.comamounts to "circumventing a publisher’s copyright access control technology" in violation of the DMCA.
-
By this logic, a corporate firewall would be in violation of the DMCA, because it blocks many domains, some of which might be tracking sites that are used by companies that want to issue DMCA takedowns.
-
From the horse's mouth: https://blog.getadmiral.com/dmca-easylist-adblock-copyright-access-control-admiral-10-things-to-know/
The code in question attempts to circumvent copyright access controls to copyrighted content on the site listed in the title of this commit (https://github.com/easylist/easylist/commit/1ba8d4afeec6d562a5871fc7504c756e4b2bd5bc ) by adding functionalclam[.]com to code in the repository.
...
Pursuant to § 1201(a)(3)(B), a technological measure “effectively controls access to a work” if, “in the ordinary course of its operation, it requires the application of information, or a process or a treatment, with the authority of the copyright owner, to gain access to the work.” The copyright access control platform employed by the copyright owner in this case does exactly that, allowing access to copyrighted content on a site only once a visitor has met the terms of access authorized by the copyright owner to gain access to the content. There are multiple parts to the copyright access control platform, including but not limited to, code on the domain functionalclam[.]com, called as part of the technological measure to effectively control access to the content.Pursuant to § 1201(a)(3)(A), to “circumvent a technological measure” includes “to avoid, bypass, remove, deactivate, or impair a technological measure, without the authority of the copyright owner”. The infringing code listed below is designed or produced to circumvent the copyright access control platform described above, by specifically avoiding, bypassing, removing, deactivating or impairing calls to functionalclam[.]com so users of the circumvention can access copyrighted works without the authority of the copyright owner.
...Full text is at the link.
-
-
@el_heffe said in Is adblocking a DMCA violation?:
That domain appears to be owned by US-based anti-adblocking company Admiral who claims that publishers have lost $13.4 Billion so far this year, due to AdBlock.
Couldn't have happened to a nicer bunch. "Anti-adblocking" = malware. With any luck, adblockers will put them out of business.
-
@masonwheeler said in Is adblocking a DMCA violation?:
@el_heffe said in Is adblocking a DMCA violation?:
That domain appears to be owned by US-based anti-adblocking company Admiral who claims that publishers have lost $13.4 Billion so far this year, due to AdBlock.
Couldn't have happened to a nicer bunch. "Anti-adblocking" = malware. With any luck, adblockers will put them out of business.
Can you put someone out of business by taking away money they never had in the first place?
http://i.imgur.com/ToM3Nqw.png
-
I sometimes secretly hope the US keeps getting stricter copyright and patent laws, so that the rest of the world will be at an advantage.
-
Also, I noticed the
flame wartag at the bottom of this thread so
-
Good riddance. Ad blocking is basically theft
-
@bb36e said in Is adblocking a DMCA violation?:
Good riddance. Ad blocking is basically theft
But is it more theft than a downloaded car?
-
@bb36e said in Is adblocking a DMCA violation?:
Ad blocking is basically
theftcommon sense, when insecure ads serving up malware run rampant across the webFTFY
-
Well, a website is subject to copyright, including the displayed ads. Removing those adds would constitute modifying a copyrighted work without permission.
I don't know which, if any, exceptions, would apply.
If it would be a violation though, the second question is where to draw the line. Not running flash can modify the intended appearance of a website; would not installing flash constitute a copyright violation? What about not running the malware browser addon some company requires to view their page? Even if you didn't want to view the page?
Over here, I'd say good question for a judge. Over in the US, probably less so.
EDIT: Whichever clause covers newspaper clippings is probably a good place to look for an applicable exception.
-
@pleegwat said in Is adblocking a DMCA violation?:
Well, a website is subject to copyright, including the displayed ads. Removing those adds would constitute modifying a copyrighted work without permission.
I don't know which, if any, exceptions, would apply.
How so? The website remains unchanged; it's just your local copy that's any different. (Under this theory, it would be a copyright violation to tear a page out of a book!) No copyright violation exists, and thus no exceptions need apply.
If it would be a violation though, the second question is where to draw the line.
I draw the line at my computer's network adapter. Once it crosses over onto my property, it plays by my rules.
-
@pleegwat said in Is adblocking a DMCA violation?:
Well, a website is subject to copyright, including the displayed ads.
Not unless the publisher of said website produced the included ads.
-
@masonwheeler said in Is adblocking a DMCA violation?:
How so? The website remains unchanged; it's just your local copy that's any different. (Under this theory, it would be a copyright violation to tear a page out of a book!) No copyright violation exists, and thus no exceptions need apply.
Hm, yeah, copyright only covers redistribution doesn't it? So for the newspaper clipping it only applies to the clipping itself (which is fair use). Any modification you do locally doesn't apply since it's not redistribution. But instructions on how to modify may still be an interesting grey area.
@tsaukpaetra said in Is adblocking a DMCA violation?:
@pleegwat said in Is adblocking a DMCA violation?:
Well, a website is subject to copyright, including the displayed ads.
Not unless the publisher of said website produced the included ads.
I am quite sure you can't legally buy a stock of newspapers against full value, black out the ads, and sell it on for the same price. No clue under what reasoning but they're bound to be able to find something against it.
-
@pleegwat said in Is adblocking a DMCA violation?:
@tsaukpaetra said in Is adblocking a DMCA violation?:
@pleegwat said in Is adblocking a DMCA violation?:
Well, a website is subject to copyright, including the displayed ads.
Not unless the publisher of said website produced the included ads.
I am quite sure you can't legally buy a stock of newspapers against full value, black out the ads, and sell it on for the same price. No clue under what reasoning but they're bound to be able to find something against it.
Wont know until you try, eh?
-
@bb36e said in Is adbTraditional locking a DMCA violation?:
Good riddance. Ad blocking is basically theft
I would almost agree with that if it wasn't for the fact that the vast majority of advertising on the internet is completely fraudulent.
Most traditional advertising (television, newspaper, etc.) is trying to sell an actual product. It might be a really shitty product that isn't worth 1% of the selling price, but at least it's a real product.
Internet advertising is mostly just clickbait. And malware.
-
@el_heffe said in Is adblocking a DMCA violation?:
I would almost agree with that if it wasn't for the fact that the vast majority of advertising on the internet is completely fraudulent.
Cite? Even tiny shreds of evidence for this claim? Itty bitty shreds?
-
@blakeyrat said in Is adblocking a DMCA violation?:
@el_heffe said in Is adblocking a DMCA violation?:
I would almost agree with that if it wasn't for the fact that the vast majority of advertising on the internet is completely fraudulent.
Cite? Even tiny shreds of evidence for this claim? Itty bitty shreds?
Is this your first day on the internet?
-
@el_heffe said in Is adblocking a DMCA violation?:
Is this your first day on the internet?
That's not evidence. Insane claims require insanely-good evidence to back them up.
-
@blakeyrat said in Is adblocking a DMCA violation?:
@el_heffe said in Is adblocking a DMCA violation?:
Is this your first day on the internet?
That's not evidence. Insane claims require insanely-good evidence to back them up.
Prove me wrong.
Prove that the majority of advertising on the internet is not fraudulent.
-
@el_heffe said in Is adblocking a DMCA violation?:
I would almost agree with that if it wasn't for the fact that the vast majority of advertising on the internet is completely fraudulent
I use an ad blocker and would recommend that my family use one as well for security purposes, but i think this is only valid if you're talking about sketchy ad networks. The ads on thedailywtf.com and the web comic sites that I browse are perfectly fine.
That said, I'd wager that most of the ads that my family sees are on sketchy video streaming sites and torrent trackers, so this may hold more weight for them than for me.
-
@el_heffe said in Is adblocking a DMCA violation?:
Prove me wrong.
Prove that the majority of advertising on the internet is not fraudulent.You made the claim; it's your responsibility to prove it right. Or at least justified by SOMETHING other than the insane voices in your nut-case head.
I mean, we both know you can't, because it's insane. But I'd like to see you at least try.
-
@blakeyrat I don't know if there have been any academic(ish) studies on the frequency of malicious ads. But there are enough bad ads (malware ridden, popups, clickjackers, etc.) out there that adblocking is a security and privacy measure.
-
@coderpatsy I'm not making any argument for or against ad-blocking, I'm just calling out an obviously-insane claim as being obviously-insane.
I will say though that if you have to resort to insane claims like "invisible dragons will eat you if you don't do it!" it kind of weakens the case a bit.
-
@pleegwat said in Is adblocking a DMCA violation?:
I am quite sure you can't legally buy a stock of newspapers against full value, black out the ads, and sell it on for the same price. No clue under what reasoning but they're bound to be able to find something against it.
Right of first sale says it should be legal. This is how, for example, artists can make collages with newspaper clippings and so on for display or sale.
-
@bb36e said in Is adblocking a DMCA violation?:
@el_heffe said in Is adblocking a DMCA violation?:
I would almost agree with that if it wasn't for the fact that the vast majority of advertising on the internet is completely fraudulent
I use an ad blocker and would recommend that my family use one as well for security purposes, but i think this is only valid if you're talking about sketchy ad networks. The ads on thedailywtf.com and the web comic sites that I browse are perfectly fine.
That said, I'd wager that most of the ads that my family sees are on sketchy video streaming sites and torrent trackers, so this may hold more weight for them than for me.
I've had sketchy ads on news network sites and other sites that "should know better." I think the problem is most ad networks are shitty at filtering the malicious advertisers.
-
@the_quiet_one said in Is adblocking a DMCA violation?:
I've had sketchy ads on news network sites and other sites that "should know better." I think the problem is most ad networks are shitty at filtering the malicious advertisers.
They're in the business of selling ad space. It's not in their best interest to be too picky about who they'll sell it to.
-
@anotherusername said in Is adblocking a DMCA violation?:
@the_quiet_one said in Is adblocking a DMCA violation?:
I've had sketchy ads on news network sites and other sites that "should know better." I think the problem is most ad networks are shitty at filtering the malicious advertisers.
They're in the business of selling ad space. It's not in their best interest to be too picky about who they'll sell it to.
I know that but they'd certainly change their tune if the big players stopped using those networks.
-
@el_heffe said in Is adblocking a DMCA violation?:
Can you put someone out of business by taking away money they never had in the first place?
Well, yes: it’s called “being in debt.”
Not saying it would apply in this particular case, but in general, taking away enough money a company doesn’t have is probably the quickest way to put it out of business — short of, say, firebombing their premises, anyway.
-
@gurth said in Is adblocking a DMCA violation?:
probably the quickest way to put it out of business — short of, say, firebombing their premises, anyway.
Stop giving me evil ideas about scumbag advertisers.
-
@dkf said in Is adblocking a DMCA violation?:
@gurth said in Is adblocking a DMCA violation?:
probably the quickest way to put it out of business — short of, say, firebombing their premises, anyway.
Stop giving me evil ideas about scumbag advertisers.
If you set up a kickstarter, I'll back you!
-
@el_heffe said in Is adblocking a DMCA violation?:
Two days ago, a commit appeared in the Easylist repo on Github, removing the domain
functionalclam.comfrom Easylist, following a DMCA takedown notice filed with Github. That domain appears to be owned by US-based anti-adblocking company Admiral who claims that publishers have lost $13.4 Billion so far this year, due to AdBlock.I'd be surprised if they've lost as much as $1.34 from AdBlock.
Also, I decided to have a look at that site mentioned:
Are you sure about that?
-
@pleegwat said in Is adblocking a DMCA violation?:
Removing those adds would constitute modifying a copyrighted work without permission.
That is some high level fake internet lawyering.
-
@bb36e said in Is adblocking a DMCA violation?:
Good riddance. Ad blocking is basically theft
Less so than ads that use up my data allowance
@pleegwat said in Is adblocking a DMCA violation?:
Removing those adds would constitute modifying a copyrighted work without permission.
How about "not displaying them to begin with?"
@blakeyrat said in Is adblocking a DMCA violation?:
Cite? Even tiny shreds of evidence for this claim? Itty bitty shreds?
We need to talk about the internet's fake ads problem
Promoted stories placed at the bottom of some of the world's most-respected websites are being gamed to show fake news
Ad watchdog to launch crackdown on misleading internet ads
The advertising watchdog will launch a crackdown next year on businesses that run misleading internet ads that rip off consumers.
Why Are People Using Ad Blockers? Ads Can Eat Up To 79% Of Mobile Data Allotments
By now, usage caps on both fixed and wireless networks have grown increasingly common. And while broadband carriers are endlessly looking toward caps and zero rating for a competitive and financial…
Malware: what it is, how it works, and how to stop it – Norton
Learn how to protect your devices from malware with our comprehensive guide. Discover what it is, how to stop it, and tips to keep your digital world secure.
You say advertising, I say block that malware
The real reason online advertising is doomed and adblockers thrive? Its malware epidemic is unacknowledged, and out of control. The Forbes 30 Under 30 list came out this week and it featured a prominent security researcher. Other researchers were pleased to see one of their own getting positive...
@blakeyrat said in Is adblocking a DMCA violation?:
I'm not making any argument for or against ad-blocking
Rebuttion of an argument used for ad-blocking is an argument against it. Plus you have a case history of arguing against ad-blocking and being an advocate of advertising in general.
-
@pjh That's all evidence for the assertion that "Some fraudulent ads exist". But no-one is suggesting that assertion is false.
The insane assertion is that "the vast majority of advertising on the internet is completely fraudulent." Nothing you've posted supports that assertion even a teeny tiny little bit.
-
@gwowen said in Is adblocking a DMCA violation?:
Nothing you've posted supports that assertion even a teeny tiny little bit.
"If I close my eyes, so I can't see it anymore, it doesn't exist."
-
@pjh said in Is adblocking a DMCA violation?:
"If I close my eyes, so I can't see it anymore, it doesn't exist."
Some - many, even - ads are fraudulent. Obviously true, undisputed by everyone here, completely supported by your links.
The vast majority of ads are completely fraudulent. Completely unsupported by your links.
Look, I don't like agreeing with @blakeyrat so if you have some actual real evidence, can you hurry up and post it? Thanks.
-
@gwowen said in Is adblocking a DMCA violation?:
Look, I don't like agreeing with @blakeyrat so if you have some actual real evidence, can you hurry up and post it? Thanks.
Again? No.
-
@pjh said in Is adblocking a DMCA violation?:
@gwowen said in Is adblocking a DMCA violation?:
Look, I don't like agreeing with @blakeyrat so if you have some actual real evidence, can you hurry up and post it? Thanks.
Again? No.
Once will do.
-
@blakeyrat said in Is adblocking a DMCA violation?:
You made the claim; it's your responsibility to prove it right. Or at least justified by SOMETHING other than the insane voices in your nut-case head.
I mean, we both know you can't, because it's insane. But I'd like to see you at least try.
As @El_Heffe said above, "is this your first day on the internet?"
Something that should be common knowledge by way of personal experience to anyone who's spent any amount of time online is not an extraordinary claim, and it does not require extraordinary evidence.
The first time I visited a legitimate website that should have been perfectly safe and had an ad on the page use malicious JavaScript to try to serve malware to me, with no interaction whatsoever on my part with the displayed ad content on the page, was more than ten years ago. It's only gotten worse since then, and every even slightly computer savvy person knows it. So why don't you?
-
@gwowen said in Is adblocking a DMCA violation?:
@pjh said in Is adblocking a DMCA violation?:
"If I close my eyes, so I can't see it anymore, it doesn't exist."
Some - many, even - ads are fraudulent. Obviously true, undisputed by everyone here, completely supported by your links.
The vast majority of ads are completely fraudulent. Completely unsupported by your links.
Look, I don't like agreeing with @blakeyrat so if you have some actual real evidence, can you hurry up and post it? Thanks.
I will not claim "the vast majority" as that is clearly hyperbole.
However, I WILL say there's enough really malicious ads that many ad networks hosts which are used by otherwise decent and trustworthy sites to make ad blockers a reasonable safeguard against malware. Any ad that hijacks my phone to a fake app store page or an ad that relocates me to a 1,000,000th visitor giveaway page with an audible "you're winner!" Sound clip is malicious and I've found these ads on sites of all shapes and colors.
Ad blockers are not just for the security of my device but lowers my rage and blood pressure to a reasonable level. Hell, it should not only be legal, but also covered by health insurance.
-
@the_quiet_one said in Is adblocking a DMCA violation?:
However, I WILL say there's enough really malicious ads that many ad networks hosts which are used by otherwise decent and trustworthy sites to make ad blockers a reasonable safeguard against malware.
I agree completely. That's the reason that I use AdBlocker(s).
-
-
@masonwheeler said in Is adblocking a DMCA violation?:
So why don't you?
OK, so here's a much easier challenge to support your thesis:
Give a single URL to a reputable website (Fortune 500 company, major credible news outlet, popular Reddit type discussion site, ESPN, TheRinger, hackernews, stackoverflow ... whatever. I'll be pretty lenient in what I consider reputable. No warez of pr0n links)
I'll go to that website and in an anonymous Chromium & Firefox tab with all extensions off and click refresh a few dozen times.
To prove your thesis, that website should try and infect my PC with malware within 5 minutes.
Since the internet is such a swamp, this should be pretty easy, yes?
-
@pjh said in Is adblocking a DMCA violation?:
Rebuttion of an argument used for ad-blocking is an argument against it.
Incidentally, no it isn't. "The Unabomber didn't bomb Pearl Harbor" is not an argument in favour of The Unabomber.
-
@gwowen said in Is adblocking a DMCA violation?:
@masonwheeler said in Is adblocking a DMCA violation?:
So why don't you?
OK, so here's a much easier challenge to support your thesis:
Give a single URL to a reputable website (Fortune 500 company, major credible news outlet, popular Reddit type discussion site, ESPN, TheRinger, hackernews, stackoverflow ... whatever. I'll be pretty lenient in what I consider reputable. No warez of pr0n links)
I'll go to that website and in an anonymous Chromium & Firefox tab with all extensions off and click refresh a few dozen times.
To prove your thesis, that website should try and infect my PC with malware within 5 minutes.
Since the internet is such a swamp, this should be pretty easy, yes?
How about Forbes?
Forbes Site, After Begging You To Turn Off Adblocker, Serves Up A Steaming Pile Of Malware 'Ads'
We had just discussed a couple of websites, Forbes amongst them, joining the ranks of sites that were attempting to hold their content hostage over people’s use of adblockers. The general poi…
-
@gwowen said in Is adblocking a DMCA violation?:
@pjh said in Is adblocking a DMCA violation?:
Rebuttion of an argument used for ad-blocking is an argument against it.
Incidentally, no it isn't. "The Unabomber didn't bomb Pearl Harbor" is not an argument in favour of The Unabomber.
It just proves he wasn't German.
-
@gwowen said in Is adblocking a DMCA violation?:
To prove your thesis, that website should try and infect my PC with malware within 5 minutes.
In 21 years on the Internet, I've never had an ad try to infect my PC with malware.
This topic is making me feel like that's extremely unusual for some reason. I don't know what's up with that. I guess the next ten replies to this post are going to be people telling me my objective experience is wrong.
-
@gwowen said in Is adblocking a DMCA violation?:
"The Unabomber didn't bomb Pearl Harbor" is not an argument in favour of The Unabomber.
Indeed - it's an argument against leaky metaphors.
