4 ms·
Well, why not? If taking ads out is legal, then why not putting ads in? What country are you talking about? (Legality of course depends on country.) What la
by spacehome 11y ago
Well, why not? If taking ads out is legal, then why not putting ads in?
What country are you talking about? (Legality of course depends on country.) What law could they be breaking? And bonus points if there's somebody else who's ever been prosecuted for something remotely similar.
- bhickey 11y agoCleanFlicks was a Utah company that bowdlerized films. The Directors Guild successfully sued them for copyright infringement.
- sp332 11y agoSince there's no copying or redistribution going on, copyright doesn't seem relevant.
- bhickey 11y agoI wouldn't be so sure of this. ClearPlay, for example, works by marking video frames where unwanted content appears and then skipping over them during playback. The Family Home Movie Act 2005 carved out an exception for this in 17 USC 10(11): https://www.law.cornell.edu/uscode/text/17/110 https://www.law.cornell.edu/uscode/text/17/110 There's an analogy between deleting objectionable portions of a film and parts of a website. I'll ask my copyright attorney friends, I'd bet this is an unresolved question.
- sp332 11y agoOk. And remember that the copyright holder for the page doesn't own the copyright in the ads you're blocking, so each copyrighted work might be loaded in its entirety or not at all. Other transformations have been done on webpages forever. In fact blocking all images was a built-in feature of most browsers until a few years ago.