3 ms·
I don't agree. If I get a magazine which is mostly not financed by my payment but the ads, and rip out all ads and throw them away, or throw the ad supplements
by BogusIKnow 11y ago
I don't agree. If I get a magazine which is mostly not financed by my payment but the ads, and rip out all ads and throw them away, or throw the ad supplements away and not read them, is it theft?
If it is theft blocking (aka not reading) ads online, is it theft if I just don't read them? And I don't want to argue, just interested, where is the difference in not reading them and blocking them? Is it morally imperative to read all ads in a magazine?
So I came to the conclusion, because I throw away ad supplement of magazines right away and don't read ads in magazines, me ad blocking can't be theft either, or not reading ads in magazines is theft too.
PS: Because you bringing up bit torrent implying people who ad block are also downloading films, well, I'm not.
- nwhitmore 11y agoSo, if it is ok for you to view content while denying the content producers the ability to monetize that content, then would you also agree it is ok to take content from behind a paywall and display it for free on your site? If not, what is it specifically that makes the first ok but not the other?
- RUG3Y 11y agoNo one is denying content providers the right to monetize by blocking ads. The onus is on them to find a business model that the market will support.
- BogusIKnow 11y ago@nwhitmore: No. I'm not proposing circumventing copyright measures. But I do not read ads a website presents. I would not steal a magazine form a news stand or break a lock to get a magazine. But I throw away ad supplements before I read anything in a magazine.