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

Spotify will now suspend or terminate accounts it finds are using ad blockers

techcrunch.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

831–840 of 963 posts

Re: Spotify will now suspend or terminate accounts it finds are using ad blockers

#831

Post by userbinator »

bad_user wrote: post #750
meddlin wrote: post #681

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I agree with your sentiment, but there's one piece of this whole thing I have a big problem with. It's my device. I understand Spotify's motivation to want compensation for their great service, but shouldn't I be able to run my software, on my device, on my terms? I understand this argument doesn't solve anything, and puts Spotify in a bad situation. But...how long until someone creates a solution to scrub the audio…

What you're witnessing is the inevitable backlash. It's your device. But Spotify also has the right to block your device. > ...how long until someone creates a solution to scrub the audio of ads in real-time? Let me tell you a little open secret. Ad-blocking in general can be circumvented right now. Even the most aggressive ad-blocking techniques can be brought to their knees, because they can be detected and the web…

It's irrelevant, because the publisher can deploy DRM in such a way as to make ad-blocking attempts illegal and easy to trace

How can they detect me covering the screen, looking away, or just not listening? How can that be illegal?

It's a cat-and-mouse game, and the mice will always win. Ultimately you'll get to the "analog hole of adblocking" situation anyway (user simply takes the headphones off or closes eyes or looks away etc.)

Re: Spotify will now suspend or terminate accounts it finds are using ad blockers

#832

Post by angus-prune »

heheocoenev wrote: post #793
angus-prune wrote: post #777

Earlier quoted context omitted.

a) absolutely - they are not stopping you from doing whatever you want on your machine, they are just not allowing to use their service. I don't think anyone would advocate making "ad blocker" a protected characteristic alongside race, gender, sexuality etc b) absolutely - most people either don't use ad blockers, and of those that do, most people are not militantly committed to them. There will be a set of people wh…

I would advocate for legal rights to use an adblocker! If we don’t, it’s going to be banned under CFAA in the future. Ads suck! Nobody has the right to force these on me!

No they don't. And I think that we have a right to block ads that to block any and all ads that we receive.

Conversely, any (non-critical) service has the right to stop showing us ads or serving us in any other way.

Re: Spotify will now suspend or terminate accounts it finds are using ad blockers

#833

Post by traviscj »

anoncake wrote: post #792
adventured wrote: post #791

Earlier quoted context omitted.

In fact they do have the right to restrict how people use their service. They're about to trivially prove that exact point by terminating accounts that use ad blockers.

Ability != right

They have both.

Re: Spotify will now suspend or terminate accounts it finds are using ad blockers

#834

Post by joshuamorton »

Sohcahtoa82 wrote: post #709
jancsika wrote: post #647

Earlier quoted context omitted.

"Ad blocker" is #1 thing that should be installed first on every single browser, everywhere, to block third party ads. Then we browse. Heck, that browser Brendan Eich is working on comes pre-installed with one. So this isn't some fringe position I hold. It's basic web hygiene. > When people aren't willing to pay for 1-2 coffees for a month of unlimited music streaming are you really surprised that companies have no c…

> "Ad blocker" is #1 thing that should be installed first on every single browser, everywhere, to block third party ads. Agreed. But I don't block ads just because ads are annoying. I don't even block ads because I don't like being tracked. My reason for blocking ads can be summed up in a single word. Malvertising. As soon as ad networks began trying to spread malware through ads was when ads moved from being a nuisa…

Can someone explain to me where these "malverts" come up? I use two chrome profiles, 1 with an adblocker and 1 without, and browse pretty often with both, and while the experience without is undeniably worse (slower, bloated, garbage on the page), I've never gotten malware.

What is this stuff and where do I find it?

Re: Spotify will now suspend or terminate accounts it finds are using ad blockers

#835

Post by bostonpete »

Bartweiss wrote: post #719
stale2002 wrote: post #642

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I am not sure why you are accusing someone of a crime ("stealing"). Installing an ad blocker is within someone's full legal right. Why are you making false statements regarding what is or is not a crime?

On a related note, getting unapproved access described as "stealing" (or theft, or piracy, or...) didn't stop being a nasty rhetorical trick just because it became standard. Creating another copy or playthrough of a song without permission doesn't have zero cost, fine, but the entire conversation is cheapened when people talk like it's the same thing as pocketing a cassette tape from a store.

If I took a copy of Stephen King's next book off his editor's computer and post it for free online before he sold a single copy, would it be a nasty rhetorical truck to call that stealing/theft/piracy...?

Re: Spotify will now suspend or terminate accounts it finds are using ad blockers

#836

Post by SturgeonsLaw »

Scoundreller wrote: post #778
Bonooru wrote: post #550

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I haven't ever used spotify, so forgive my ignorance. How are they measuring the system volume from inside a webapp? Shouldn't that information not be visible to them?

I have this issue with the NPR One web player on Windows7. When the laptop is muted and I press the physical button to unmute it, the mute light goes off, but the web player soft-mutes. Argh. Why can’t the mute button just be a physical switch!?!?!?

You could try getting a 3.5mm stereo cable, cutting the end off and using that as your physical mute button. Not sure if that routes audio to the "headphones" at the software or firmware level, but anything reading volume levels would still see it set to whatever level the OS is at.

Re: Spotify will now suspend or terminate accounts it finds are using ad blockers

#837

Post by mlthoughts2018 »

EpicEng wrote: post #670
michaelmrose wrote: post #666

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The user wins in that they retain control of their device which is slightly more significant than the ability to listen to some tunes.

...ok so then we're back at "you do not have the right to use the service in any way you like." Glad we agree.

Nobody is “using the service in any way you like” at all. Preventing some certain pixels for being allowed to be displayed on a piece of my personal property has no connection, legal or otherwise, to usage of some freely emitted data stream someone else decided to send out freely to the world.

The person who sends it out to the world might write some things down or complain about what they want to control on my personal property, but it is just not relevant to anything. They are free to stop producing a freely available data stream if they don’t want to. Just like I am free to keep blocking certain infos they try to send me (ads).

Re: Spotify will now suspend or terminate accounts it finds are using ad blockers

#838

Post by mlthoughts2018 »

EpicEng wrote: post #633
mlthoughts2018 wrote: post #607

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I’m frankly surprised you believe terms of service regarding a data stream that a company chooses to freely emit are in any way related whatsoever to a person’s right to restrict what is displayed on a physical device that they own. My screen is not Spotify’s property. They are allowed to TRY to display something on it, and it will only be displayed IF I LET THEM. There’s no discussion here.

>My screen is not Spotify’s property. They are allowed to TRY to display something on it, and it will only be displayed IF I LET THEM. There’s no discussion here And they will only send you that stream IF YOU LET THEM (display ads). That's the deal whether or not you like it. You don't get to substitute your own. So, they win, you lose.

No I will just legally circumvent to control what is displayed on my property.

Re: Spotify will now suspend or terminate accounts it finds are using ad blockers

#839

Post by mlthoughts2018 »

EpicEng wrote: post #632
mlthoughts2018 wrote: post #602

Earlier quoted context omitted.

It is my private property (my screen). I absolutely do have the right to use it partially if Spotify is emitting it freely. Their terms of service have utterly no relevance to what I disallow to be shown on my private property.

Ok so they'll ban you and then... what? You'll have no recourse, i.e., you have no inherent right to use their service as you see fit (outside your own head anyway).

I’ll use technology to legally circumvent the ban, as has been happening since the dawn of the fool’s errand that is DRM or free channel restriction.

Re: Spotify will now suspend or terminate accounts it finds are using ad blockers

#840

Post by mlthoughts2018 »

School-Cotton wrote: post #722
mlthoughts2018 wrote: post #531

Earlier quoted context omitted.

What do you mean freeloader? They chose to distribute the content for free, not me. If they mistakenly thought this would allow them to guarantee certain things to appear on some private citizen’s personal property, it sounds like a very foolish decision on their part. It might mean they have to shut down the free version of their content or something. If they try to circumvent my ability to control what is shown on…

> They chose to distribute the content for free, not me. Yes, and now they are freely choosing NOT to distribute the content for free, except to people without adblockers.

No you mean to anyone who circumvents the banning mechanism legally.. so like, everyone who wishes to.
Post reply on HN