[mattbessey]

I can just about understand this attitude with services that do not have an ad-free subscription option, but Spotify does! How do you reconcile that you deserve to be able to use Spotify both without paying them money and without them monetising you via ads?

[13415]

Why not? Spotify is not entitled to forcing you to display their ads either, and there are plenty of other free services on the Net that don't require you to watch ads.

[godshatter]

Because they offer it? They are giving public access to music and ads, choosing to only accept their offer of downloading the music (given that the ads are annoying and may contain malware) is only making use of part of what they offer. Their business model is their own business. Mine is making sure my computer stays secure and that I'm not bothered by annoying interruptions.

Not that I have ever used Spotify, but that would be how I would defend it. If I did, I would just move on since my account would soon be suspended.

So how does Spotify defend running potentially malicious ads from 3rd party providers on end-user systems? Do they even vet those ads? Are they even aware of what code will be running on users computers that they are serving via the ad frameworks?