Slashdot Mirror
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.
No, the NAA is wrong, and Brave explain why they're wrong quite clearly and elegantly. You should read their rebuttal, it's quite good. Duck arguments don't work legally, and for good reason. It's nothing like tying a string to a door etc. No republication is happening. I repeat, no republication is happening. Reformatting content on a client is not republishing. Publishers might not like it (the whole thing sounds like a scam to me) but the republishing argument has no weight, legally or morally.
I agree, and adblockers are necessary to avoid my bandwidth being stolen by ads and the risk of malicious ads intruding on my computer.
If builders built buildings the way programmers wrote programs, then the first woodpecker would destroy civilization.
People are taking the piss out of you everyday. They butt into your life, take a cheap shot at you and then disappear. They leer at you from tall buildings and make you feel small. They make flippant comments from buses that imply you're not sexy enough and that all the fun is happening somewhere else.
They are on TV making your girlfriend feel inadequate. They have access to the most sophisticated technology the world has ever seen and they bully you with it. They are The Advertisers and they are laughing at you.
You, however, are forbidden to touch them. Trademarks, intellectual property rights and copyright law mean advertisers can say what they like wherever they like with total impunity. FUCK THAT. Any advert in a public space that gives you no choice whether you see it or not is yours. It's yours to take, re-arrange and re-use. You can do whatever you like with it. Asking for permission is like asking to keep a rock someone just threw at your head.
You owe the companies nothing. Less than nothing, you especially don't owe then any courtesy. They owe you. They have re-arranged the world to put themselves in front of you. They never asked for your permission, don't even start asking for theirs.
-- Banksy
Don't fight for your country, if your country does not fight for you.
Other browsers have ad-blocker add-ons
They're upset because he very well may have outsmarted them, and figured out a way for people to view ads. To be honest, if Brave is vetting ads, and paying me to watch them I'm likely going to give that a go, and with luck that'll be a perfectly fine solution to the current "OMG YOU'RE THIEVES" BS that sites are pushing, and the "OMG AD-BLOCKERS AM ARE THE DEVILS" that the advertising companies are pushing.
Om, nomnomnom...