Newspapers Try To Stop Ad-blocking Browser Brave From 'Stealing Content'

New reader DarkLordBelial writes: The newspaper Association of America (NAA) has sent a letter to Brave Software, makers of the Brave browser, detailing how little they think of Brave's proposed solution. In the letter, NAA says Brave Software "should be viewed as illegal and deceptive by the courts." The letter suggests that replacing adverts with their own selected ads is no different to republishing the content and therefore copyright infringement. In response, Brave Software says all such assertions are false and that the NAA has misunderstood their business model. Founded by Mozilla's co-founder, Brave pays its users in bitcoin to watch ads. According to the company's plan, a website gets 55 percent of the money, whereas rest is distributed among users and Brave.

Comments

Ha ha ha ha

[JustAnotherOldGuy]

NAA says Brave Software "should be viewed as illegal and deceptive by the courts."

Lol, wat?

Seriously, is this grasping at imaginary straws, or what? Let's be clear here: what I do with MY browser on MY internet connection is MY business, not yours. If I choose not to display certain content or (GASP) swap it for other content, that's MY choice and is not reason to try and drag anyone into court.

Then:
Users: hey can you give us less intrusive and annoying ads
Advertisers: screw you here is your ad

Now:
Advertisers: hey please don't block our ads thanks
Users: screw you

Forbes treates Firefox privacy as ad blocking

[tepples]

Forbes straight up admits that it treats Firefox's "Open Link in New Private Window" as an ad blocker. Because Forbes doesn't do privacy, I don't do Forbes.

Re:Meanwhile

[Actually, I do RTFA]

Yeah, but it's one thing to skip past the commercials (ala Tivo) or block ads. It's another to replace them in their entirety.