Website owners ready to sue the developers of Adblock extension

[+Fulcrum Subscriber¹]

I usually just subscribe to the EasyList in ABP. I'm pretty sure it blocks ads on Neowin, but It's not installed at work so I can't verify. This is a new topic for me, I never thought about the websites which I value so much as being impacted, just the inconvenience of adultfriendfinder popups, and those flash scripts that have no exit button have led me to be preemptive.

There is an underlying issue that the internet really has no standards, so when you google something, you don't know whether the site will have annoying ads or not; thus people use ABP to prevent all ads altogether. And that's a clean way of browsing the net. However, for community sites such as this, where the same users frequent, It's practical to whitelist. I would be willing to download a Neowin subscription for ABP, but it seems excessive to just whitelist a single website, albeit, a great site :p

ABP is a tool like torrent software, but I see the same argument where they both can be used in a harmful manner, although there isn't a law defending webmasters.I expect this to get locked up in litigation, like, forever.

[Lord Ba'al]

That pic is made of awesome.

AdBlock functionality is amongst the first things people ask when trying a new browser. :) They can sue,but it's impossible for them to win.

Yes, that pic is just all too fitting :pinch:

Also, those websites are fighting windmills here, htey indeed can't possibly win.

Even in the extremely unlikely case that they managed to take down Adblock, its place would be quickly taken up by another ad-blocking extension.

[insanelyapple]

any other source of this blood-curding news?

[protocol7]

Why do i get the feeling that the "upto 70% less money" some webmasters 'claim' due to adblock is a vastly over inflated number similar to how the RIAA wants you to believe they lose an arm and a leg(and then some) from p2p?

Well if they are true (and bearing in mind that AdBlock is a Firefox extension) then Firefox accounts for over 70% of the web browser market (assuming that not all FF users will have AdBlock installed). That sure turns those browser market share figures on their head!

So yeah, they're pulling their figures out of the same rectal cavity as the copyright gang.

And as others have said, you can configure ABP to suit your needs and whitelist sites you want to support. Your web your way.

[struct]

I whitelist Neowin because I enjoy the site and prefer it to stay around at the cost of displaying ads to me. Both sides of the story have valid points. The lawlessness of the web weighs against the content providers - perhaps this will lead to more commercialism of the web beyond what is has already become. A place where only businesses with other sources of revenue and the wealthy can afford to have sites due to bandwidth bills.

[thealexweb]

Why do i get the feeling that the "upto 70% less money" some webmasters 'claim' due to adblock is a vastly over inflated number similar to how the RIAA wants you to believe they lose an arm and a leg(and then some) from p2p?

Your right, 70% of people don't use Firefox for starters and I'm sure 100% of Firefox users don't all run Adblock.

Edited June 23, 2009 by thealexweb

[Jack 0Neill]

Old, but relevant reason to block ads:

http://abcnews.go.com/Technology/Wired/sto...5901&page=1

[Neoauld]

This is BS

the kind of ppl using adblock are those who dislike ads, and would never click them, and are sick of the popups and annoyances they bring

they arent losing any money

[Raa]

The ads on the web really gripe me. I never click them myself, so I block them anyway. It gets to me when a site is 50% ads, 50% content.

I just want to see the news and get out!!! lol

Damn ads *shakes fist*

[Ji@nBing]

Personally I try and whitelist the sites I visit frequently, but if the ads are too obtrusive or annoying, I remove them from the whitelist. FTR I have Neowin on my whitelist, but even here there is one ad that really annoys me, and by most standards Neowin's ads are about as good as it gets.

The one that drives me nuts is the one smack dab in the middle of the news articles. The other two I have no problem with whatsoever. But, take a look at how much "cleaner" Neowin looks with ads blocked, and you can understand why people do it. Neowin has a lot less ads that the majority of sites on the net too, so if webmasters want people to stop bocking ads, they have to start making them more subtle and less obtrusive.

[Aero_Rising]

And as others have said, you can configure ABP to suit your needs and whitelist sites you want to support. Your web your way.

Ok then you want the web your way well I want support for the hosting bill when you visit my site. Would you rather webmasters make deals with spyware creators to infect you so they can pay their hosting bill. Yes some sites are bad and display tons of ads but is it fair to block all ads to begin with so that the sites that don't plaster the whole page with ads can't pay the bill. A better idea would be a blacklist of site's to block but you'll all say now that but then you have to put effort into blocking and you could get infected from one visit and how you're not in control and that's not fair. Well it's not fair you're leeching bandwith nothing is truly free. To those of you saying how this is terrible and who do those people think they are and how ads are just dumb let me ask you do you run a website? Do you even know how to make a website? And to the person responding to my last post I noticed the camera in your signature well here's a thought for you what if instead of people paying to use pictures you take for commercial use they just donated to you if they felt it helped whatever they used it in do better. Ads are they way webmasters get money for their work consistently donations aren't consistent and with donations people can leech your bandwith just to be mean with ads atleast it still gets you page view.

[7Dash8]

To those of you saying how this is terrible and who do those people think they are and how ads are just dumb let me ask you do you run a website?

Unfortunately that's the main problem: most people only know how to consume, not how to produce anything on the Internet. That's why they go on and on about how it's their god given right to get everything for free. If any of the leechers spent ten seconds actually putting time money and effort into producing anything they'd get what the problem is.

Things will eventually change, there's no way with the proliferation of adblockers and piracy that the Internet and software development will stay the same. Eventually people will be forced to pay in one way or another, whether through an additional ISP-based levy or some other unavoidable way. All this does is just make that change occur more rapidly.

[bangbang023 Veteran]

I don't think you can draw parallels between Neftlix and public websites. If you use Netflix without paying eventually they'll cut you off. There is no model where you can continue to receive content from Netflix without paying. You can, however, continue to visit public websites without viewing advertisements. What you're doing by displaying advertisements is the equivalent of asking for a donation, which is optional.

Normally, I would agree, but he used the analogy of using Netflix to skip commercials in television shows without seemingly realizing that he was doing so in a way that still benefited the studios. The same can't be said of blocking ads on the web as there's no equal compensation though fees kicked back to the web site owners.

[PixilEyes]

I saw this on digg today. :p

[protocol7]

Ok then you want the web your way well I want support for the hosting bill when you visit my site. Would you rather webmasters make deals with spyware creators to infect you so they can pay their hosting bill. Yes some sites are bad and display tons of ads but is it fair to block all ads to begin with so that the sites that don't plaster the whole page with ads can't pay the bill. A better idea would be a blacklist of site's to block but you'll all say now that but then you have to put effort into blocking and you could get infected from one visit and how you're not in control and that's not fair. Well it's not fair you're leeching bandwith nothing is truly free. To those of you saying how this is terrible and who do those people think they are and how ads are just dumb let me ask you do you run a website? Do you even know how to make a website? And to the person responding to my last post I noticed the camera in your signature well here's a thought for you what if instead of people paying to use pictures you take for commercial use they just donated to you if they felt it helped whatever they used it in do better. Ads are they way webmasters get money for their work consistently donations aren't consistent and with donations people can leech your bandwith just to be mean with ads atleast it still gets you page view.

Maybe I don't want to go to your website. Maybe I'll never go to it. If I do and I like what I see then I'll whitelist you. Like I said, I have the choice. This isn't a black or white issue like some people are trying to make it. It's not all ads or no ads.

But here's the thing. Why are you running a site if you're not prepared to foot the hosting? If I want a car I can't expect everyone to pay my gas. If I want an iPhone I can't expect others to pay my contract. If I want to run a site I'll pay my way. If I can't afford to I'll ask for help from my visitors. If they don't want to help then I've clearly overestimated the value of my site. It will go down, they'll go elsewhere and the world will keep turning.

I've built and ran sites in the past and never needed ads. Google AdSense wasn't even a glimmer in the eye of a college graduate back then. I didn't count page hits. I focused on what was important to me - the content. Nowadays it seems like it's all about the ads, the hits, the referrals and less about what really counts.

[cork1958]

Even if people didn't have adblock they'd use a Hosts file to block advertisements.

People have a choice on what they want to view and they should not have these things forced upon them. There are also annoying flashing ads and ads that can distribute malicious code (including viruses and trojans).

I pay for my Internet and I should not be forced to view ads if I choose not to.

Yeah,

I actually recently discovered that!! Hadn't ever used a host file before, but came across http://www.mvps.org/winhelp2002/hosts.htm a while back. Have since uninstalled IE7Pro and disabled AdBlockPlus in Seamonkey and K-Meleon.

But, yeah again,

Ads in general, do still suck!!

[bangbang023 Veteran]

But here's the thing. Why are you running a site if you're not prepared to foot the hosting? If I want a car I can't expect everyone to pay my gas. If I want an iPhone I can't expect others to pay my contract. If I want to run a site I'll pay my way. If I can't afford to I'll ask for help from my visitors. If they don't want to help then I've clearly overestimated the value of my site. It will go down, they'll go elsewhere and the world will keep turning.

I've built and ran sites in the past and never needed ads. Google AdSense wasn't even a glimmer in the eye of a college graduate back then. I didn't count page hits. I focused on what was important to me - the content. Nowadays it seems like it's all about the ads, the hits, the referrals and less about what really counts.

Except it's not like owning a car for many site owners. Instead, it's like opening up their own business. You'd be pretty ****ed if you opened a new brick and mortar store and people came in, took your services or products (in this case, bandwidth) and didn't pay because they decided it was too much of an inconvenience.

[Qumahlin]

If the consumer is willing to install a plugin specifically to ignore advertisements, then it is safe to say that consumer was not going to be generating any clickthrough revenue to begin with which is what 99% of these ads are based on.

They aren't losing any revenue because even without adblock i'm willing to be their clickthrough rates wouldn't be much higher.

[d4rk5ky]

Personally i went to Firefox just for ABP because there is no good app or anything that i liked that runs well with IE to block ads, and ads are getting more and more obtrusive as the days go by. Just like anything else on the internet though, if someone shuts something down, someone else will remake it with a different name.. its the circle of life :p

[fauxtographer]

Maybe there's something being overlooked here... but if these people are suing the developers of Adblock becuase it disables ads from being shown how do these developers justify that in many cases they are serving up an ad free RSS feed? The developers of adblock can counter in court that the RSS feed is served up free of ads so what is the legal merit to disabling ads on the html version?

[PixilEyes]

Maybe there's something being overlooked here... but if these people are suing the developers of Adblock becuase it disables ads from being shown how do these developers justify that in many cases they are serving up an ad free RSS feed? The developers of adblock can counter in court that the RSS feed is served up free of ads so what is the legal merit to disabling ads on the html version?

Never thought about the RSS feeds. Good point.

[BinaryFragger]

Except it's not like owning a car for many site owners. Instead, it's like opening up their own business. You'd be pretty ****ed if you opened a new brick and mortar store and people came in, took your services or products (in this case, bandwidth) and didn't pay because they decided it was too much of an inconvenience.

But then again, a brick and mortar store doesn't rely on advertising as its sole source of revenue.

Ignoring and throwing out a supermarket weekly flyer isn't the same as shoplifting from the store.

[Leddy]

When visiting a website, I don't think the user ever agreed with the site owners that they had to view ads. Even if they did, that would be an agreement between the user and the website, not the website and AdBlock Plus.

[Xtreme2damax]

I am running a website, even though I am struggling to get any kind of decent revenue to apply towards site expenses I still think this is quite ridiculous.

I'd have to agree on most ads being annoying, or overly obtrusive ads that websites have in place where there is no choice but to block them in order to browse comfortably. In addition to those you have ads which have the potential to infect your computer with malware, adware, spyware, and trojans.

If webmasters didn't go overboard on ads, and at least made the effort to keep them as unobtrusive as possible then visitors wouldn't be inclined to block them. Adblock merely only provides the functionality to filter out a lot of this garbage in order to provide a safer and more comfortable browsing experience without digging into your hosts file.

Regardless of whether or not adblock existed visitors would still block ads with a hosts file, after all it's usually the intelligent tech savvy users who block the ads so they would figure out another way to block them if these types of software never existed. What are they going to sue Microsoft for the Windows hosts file, and various proxies that serve a purpose for blocking annoying ads next?

Let it be up to the visitors on what they want to see, if someone is inclined to block ads it is unlikely they would of ever clicked on them to begin with.

[Richard Hammond]

Except you're actively taking a service without paying for it. Content is rarely free (isn't free on Neowin, either). Taking such content without acceptable payment is, with some flexing of the terms, theft.

Oh please so if i block ads im a thief??? It might not be free for Neowin to post but unless its subscription content i can see it for free, there are no terms and conditions that i have to view the adverts when i come to the site.

So by your twisted logic if i am watching a TV channel then i switch over when the ads come on and then back again when my favourite show is back on then i am stealing the content???

I think its unfair to blame the developers of adblock for their declining ad revenue, as the internet gets bigger and bigger more websites plaster adverts all over the page, banner and skyscraper ads at top, left, right and bottom, ads inbetween news articles, ads IN news articles, ads in text in news articles, popup ads that sometimes popup blockers dont detect, flash video/audio banners that use up my bandwidth, ads that pop up fullscreen before i get to even see the website, the more they do that the more people will get turned off and find the content elsewhere.

If they cant be competitive without making their main page 50% adverts then they cant just turn round and lay the blame on someone else, they should do something about it or close the website down.

(just to reiterate, i dont block ads especially not neowins as i find them very unobtrusive i just wish more websites would take a hint, but i also like to play devils advocate im not a sheep that conforms to any view)