|
|
|
|
|
|
by ano-ther
300 days ago
|
|
|
Adblock Plus which is the topic of this lawsuit is an ad-replacer rather than an ad-blocker -- and they make money from their own ads. I can see where that annoys publishers (and marvel that they manage to get any users). From the article: > While it offers ad blocking software, the company generates revenue from ads through its Acceptable Ads program – advertisers pay to have ads that are "respectful, nonintrusive and relevant" exempted from filtering. Non-commercial open source projects like uBlock Origin rely on community support. From https://eyeo.com/ > Deliver more effective ads to a unique and valuable audience of 400 million ad-filtering users. |
|
|
Granted, I don't know how they'd actually enforce an adblocker ban, but this is a country in which it is illegal to call politicians "idiots," and they will literally break down your door and arrest you if you do: https://www.msn.com/en-us/news/world/man-s-home-raided-after...
So, while I don't think it's likely, it's certainly not outrageous to think that a publisher could detect that you're not downloading certain content (just like how various anti-adblock scripts function) and request that police go to your address, arrest you and check your computers for "illicit adblockers."