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

Mozilla hit with takedown request for anti-paywall addons

github.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

81–90 of 405 posts

Re: Mozilla hit with takedown request for anti-paywall addons

#81

Post by cabalamat »

Angostura wrote: post #12
decasteve wrote: post #5

This breaks the social contract of the web. If you publish on the web (over HTTP) using HTML (with or without css+js) then you respect the concept of a User-Agent that renders the content on behalf of the user. If you wish to get around this then create another file format and protocol and application/plugin to do so — one that enforces the DRM for the owner. Don’t take agency away from User-Agent.

Alternatively, the add-ons break the social contract, whereby content creators request payment for their content. If you visit stuff on the web, you respect the concept of a social contract between you and the provide. Don’t try to circumvent their wishes.

> If you visit stuff on the web, you respect the concept of a social contract between you and the provide.

If I send a site an http GET request, and that site responds by giving me some data, then that site has given me implied consent to look at the data. If they don't want me to look at it, they shouldn't have given me it.

Re: Mozilla hit with takedown request for anti-paywall addons

#82

Post by betterunix2 »

dooglius wrote: post #67
betterunix2 wrote: post #26

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I am not sure it would make a difference to the courts.

Well, for one thing, it would make a takedown request like this impossible to enforce.

No, it would mean that the takedown request is satisfied by the Mozilla revoking signatures on the addons, something which the signer can always do (e.g. at a minimum they can push a new signature key and re-sign all the other addons).

Re: Mozilla hit with takedown request for anti-paywall addons

#83

Post by visarga »

trollied wrote: post #16

Just a tangent for you all - does anyone envisage a 2nd parallel internet emerging? Not tor-like, an actual completely separate network?

> does anyone envisage a 2nd parallel internet emerging

Sorry to break the news to you but it already has, and it is called Facebook. Didn't turn out as we expected. Maybe third time's a charm?

Re: Mozilla hit with takedown request for anti-paywall addons

#85

Post by realthing »

DC-3 wrote: post #61
trollied wrote: post #16

Just a tangent for you all - does anyone envisage a 2nd parallel internet emerging? Not tor-like, an actual completely separate network?

Possibly in the form of a very strict, very semantic, almost RSS-like subset of HTML? Something that almost resembles the reader view many modern browsers will convert articles into?

One would imagine this has far less to do with data rendering and more data indexing and filtering (web-crawling access).

If you read the link, Schmidts comments related to the bifurcation of the internet, he gives a simple example of two separate internets - version "USA" and version "China".

It seems in this scenario, the single source of truth for all web data is sandboxed to protect a nations (or the nations citizens) best interests (akin to modern day China, Iran). The new web would look to live in the shadows, where users can submit and view pre-filtered ideas without meddling from gatekeeps (government officials and money men)

The issue with this is data access and the sharing of information becomes limited to those with the "know how"( we are all tech literate these days), or more likely, those with the balls to commit a "crime" and disobey the permissions of "their government". This presents an almost dystopian like scenario where people are afraid to share and receive information their government has not green lighted.

Re: Mozilla hit with takedown request for anti-paywall addons

#86

Post by IfOnlyYouKnew »

wpietri wrote: post #44
Angostura wrote: post #12

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Alternatively, the add-ons break the social contract, whereby content creators request payment for their content. If you visit stuff on the web, you respect the concept of a social contract between you and the provide. Don’t try to circumvent their wishes.

It's obviously not a "request" if they're making legal threats. And it's not payment they're demanding, it's the ability to track anybody who visits their site, whether or not you agree to be tracked. And it's not part of any social contract I agreed to; the (very short) history of the web is an ongoing negotiation. Paywalls were invented this decade. This plugin is part of that negotiation. Browsers already have a m…

This is mostly about "soft" paywalls, allowing you to read maybe a dozen articles per month without paying.

There is currently no way I know of allowing this functionality that is meaningfully "reliable". At least not without erecting new barriers such as mandatory registration (and verification).

So you, and everyone else, seem to be demanding publishers just switch to "absolute paywalls". You will then have strictly less access than before.

How is that supposed to be better?

Re: Mozilla hit with takedown request for anti-paywall addons

#87

Post by crankylinuxuser »

dralley wrote: post #74
the8472 wrote: post #49

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I would even say mozilla invited this to happen by assuming sole authority which addons can get installed. They created a single point of failure. Now that SPOF gets exploited.

I'm not convinced this is a worse evil than the previous situation, which was that any and every crapware installer injected browser plugins/toolbars without consent.

Caveat emptor is always better than a petty dictatorship.

And that's what Moz is being these days; emulating the Apple App model, the Windows Phone app model, and other obnoxious "you have to ask us permission to do stuff on your device" rules.

Id rather take toolbar hell. We'd have more functionality overall.

Re: Mozilla hit with takedown request for anti-paywall addons

#88

Post by quickben »

IfOnlyYouKnew wrote: post #69
quickben wrote: post #60

The real problem is Google indexing it. Wasn't there even a rule from Google that you can't serve different content from what the general public is seeing?

The problem is people having opinions but lacking the most basic facts... This is about "soft paywalls" that allow you to read maybe a dozen articles per months.

Google indexes the entire website, often with multiple visits to the same individual page (to get comments, etc).

It definitely doesn't stop at "maybe a dozen" pages a month.

Re: Mozilla hit with takedown request for anti-paywall addons

#90

Post by IfOnlyYouKnew »

abc-xyz wrote: post #84

[flagged]

That's sorta like pushing a drowning swimmer down to stop them thrashing around.

I mean... it is going to work. Sort of.

I also feel sorry for the terrible burden that http requests seem to be for you. Meanwhile, large swaths of the richest nations no longer have local news.

I guess it's a wash...

Post reply on HN