Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

Ad blocking is under attack

blog.adguard.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

201–210 of 598 posts

Re: Ad blocking is under attack

#201

Post by Nursie »

nicc wrote: post #155
danarmak wrote: post #149

Earlier quoted context omitted.

IIUC, the DMCA says that if there's some technological mechanism X that's used to enforce copyright, and a tool Y that is (or can be) used to circumvent X, then making or distributing Y is itself illegal (as opposed to the act of using Y to circumvent X, which is already illegal even without the DMCA). The DMCA then provides a notice-based method for 'taking down' online copies of Y. In this case, X is the Admiral te…

Thanks, I understand better now. If Admiral enables paywalls, then I kind of agree with Admiral. If companies want to put paywalls, circumventing them is kind of like jumping the gate to see a concert for free. I always hit the back button, but publishers should be free to put up paywalls (no idea why they don't do it server-side, but that's another story). So, I guess the article or at least the title are a little s…

Here's the thing - if blocking the loading of your protection script from a third-party server is all it takes to bypass your paywall, haven't you really, really screwed up?

Surely it should be the other way around - the paywall doesn't let you through unless the code is accessible and gets run?

I'm not going to try and claim people wouldn't be so stupid as to try to implement it this way...

Re: Ad blocking is under attack

#202

Post by 15155 »

teraflop wrote: post #159
chad-autry wrote: post #90

Earlier quoted context omitted.

From what I can tell, the DMCA does apply (sort of) Admiral seems to be a paywall server basically. If blocking their domain gave access to paywalled content, then the DMCA seems to apply http://www.dmlp.org/legal-guide/circumventing-copyright-cont... However, that defense is a bit flimsy to me since the fall back to having the paywall blocked could/should be a "Paywall blocked, please disable your addblocker to gain…

I think it's worth mentioning that even if an easylist filter entry counts as "circumventing a technological measure that effectively controls access" -- which I think is debatable for multiple reasons -- the DMCA takedown procedure only covers copyright infringement . It does not apply to anti-circumvention measures. As Admiral's blog post points out, Github recommends using the same contact procedure for anti-circu…

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Digital_Millennium_Copyright_A...

It most certainly does apply to anti-circumvention in many cases.

Re: Ad blocking is under attack

#204

Post by YSFEJ4SWJUVU6 »

laurentdc wrote: post #130
xigency wrote: post #54

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I'm surprised no one has mentioned this alternative: disable JavaScript. It's fairly easy in any browser to create a list of websites to ignore JavaScript on.

Doesn't disabling JavaScript these days pretty much break all websites? Or do you disable by default, then keep a whitelist?

Depends on what you define as “to break”. Of all the sites I use most remain very much usable even without scripting support, but certainly some functionality is often lost (whilst performance, on the other hand...)

Re: Ad blocking is under attack

#205

Post by gremlinsinc »

skymt wrote: post #156
benchaney wrote: post #136

Earlier quoted context omitted.

You are overlooking the fact that there is no actual DMCA violation in this case. The problem is that companies being bullied with frivolous DMCA threats will comply because it is easier than fighting it. Using a blockchain removes this as an option (and also makes the bullying pointless in the first place).

And when your DMCA-proof storage system receives a valid DMCA notice for an actual case of infringement, what's the plan?

they will need contact each node..i.e. device that has the blockchain and file a dmca directly w/ each one... maybe? lol

Re: Ad blocking is under attack

#206

Post by colept »

I have a very unpopular opinion that pulls me in two directions.

Advertisements have exceeded the point of being a nuisance for many years. But adblocking is a fight that solves symptoms and will affect more than just advertising in a negative way.

The best parallel I can draw is to the Napster era when pirating music cut off the head of the chicken in the industry. Hollywood and like were refusing to adjust to digital downloads and streaming. Part of this was due to the fact that it would drive down profits. But people started pirating the content and getting it for free so they lost money anyways. It's not impossible, but it has become more difficult for artists to break into the industry (along with competition) because of the margin of profitability.

In that same vein - publishers and advertisers have resisted the market and have bled their visitors for every penny. Finally the users stood up and said enough is enough - and now we have adblocking. The problem I have with adblocking is that it doesn't resolve the problem, just the symptoms. Adblocking pushes out smalltime publishers whose only revenue are these obtrusive ads. The "big guys" can stay alive as the reduction will be drops in the water for them. The way I see adblocking is that it will only drive the publishing industry further towards monopolies who will push the little guys out. And once you are getting all your content from 1-3 sources and the little guys are gone - there's nothing to stop them from becoming the same monoliths that exist as Internet Service Providers. They control the means and have no urge to change.

I stand on the fence, wishing there was a better solution to this problem but some times the only way to bring change is to burn it down first and start from scratch.

Re: Ad blocking is under attack

#207

Post by [deleted] »

jrochkind1 wrote: post #186
danarmak wrote: post #178

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The DMCA doesn't just let you request the takedown of copyrighted content. It lets you request the takedown of tools which can be used to "circumvent technological restrictions" on accessing other, unrelated copyrighted content. So for instance, when the CSS encryption on DVDs was broken, there were DMCA takedown requests issued to sites hosting the deCSS decryption code, even though the copyright of that code itself…

That could be, cite to the law or description of it? I'm interested in learning more. What I see in the law ( https://www.law.cornell.edu/uscode/text/17/512 ) is that a "notification of claimed infringement" must include "Identification of the copyrighted work claimed to have been infringed, or, if multiple copyrighted works at a single online site are covered by a single notification, a representative list of such w…

[deleted]

Re: Ad blocking is under attack

#208

Post by mod »

nkkollaw wrote: post #101

I didn't get what the hell happened. So, Admiral—an anti-adblocker company—contacted EasyList and told them to remove a domain from their list. This domain was a server they needed for their anti-adblocker platform to work. EasyList told Admiral that they would only do it if GitHub agreed, so Admiral contacted GitHub and the domain was removed from the EasyList list after GitHub told EasyList they should comply. The…

Frankly parts of this summary sound like the Admiral spin on things.

> So, Admiral—an anti-adblocker company—contacted EasyList and told them to remove a domain from their list.

In reality, a new Github account made a comment on a commit. That account had no identifying details to link them to a company, person, or anything else. For all intents and purposes, it was nobody.

The account is @dmcahelper on Github. It has a marketing blurb in the bio (which mentions no companies or individuals' names) and has starred one repo, Github's dmca repo.

> EasyList told Admiral that they would only do it if GitHub agreed

A reply said that, essentially, "if you're Github and trying to tell me something, a brand new account isn't one of the channels I'm listening on."

(Anonymous) Admiral didn't reply to that comment.

IMO EasyList had no choice but to thoroughly ignore that comment, as it would be ridiculous to act on it.

Re: Ad blocking is under attack

#209

Post by augustus0 »

mnarayan01 wrote: post #19

Via https://github.com/easylist/easylist/commit/a4d380ad1a3b33a0... by one of the Easylist maintainers: > If it is a Circumvention/Adblock-Warning adhost, it should be removed from Easylist even without the need for a DMCA request. Anyone know why he's saying this? Edit: I guess he's referring to the following via https://easylist.to/2013/05/10/anti-adblock-guide-for-site-a... : > Anti-Adblock should only be challeng…

I didn't realize that anti-adblock lists were generally maintained separately, and this comment tipped me off to it.

If you're using something like uBlock, it might be worth going into Settings -> 3rd-party filters. There's a few lists in there which are not enabled by default that are curated to work around anti-adblocking technologies. For example, "Adblock Warning Removal List".

Re: Ad blocking is under attack

#210

Post by gremlinsinc »

richardknop wrote: post #77
gremlinsinc wrote: post #13

Wonder if we could create a git in the blockchain... where DMCA just can't exist/happen since there's no central authority to ask to take stuff down...

Make a quick ICO. You will raise 200 million in 1 hour. /sarcasm This is half decent idea though actually.

damn if not for the /sarcasm tag I might've actually done it...actually might still could use a couple $mill.
Post reply on HN