4 ms·
Whoa! It's not defrauding advertisers, unless you want to claim that clicking a link on the internet without intending to purchase something is considered frau
by czep 9y ago
Whoa! It's not defrauding advertisers, unless you want to claim that clicking a link on the internet without intending to purchase something is considered fraudulent.
- chii 9y agoActually, a court of law take into account intent. Misclicking on a link is not fraud, but intentionally misclicking is indeed fraud, if you know if had an intended effect on the budget of the advertiser.
- slavik81 9y agoIs it? The user would have to be making a misrepresentation by doing so. Is clicking an ad link really a statement that meaningfully communicates anything? Or is the advertiser merely inferring a meaning and getting it wrong for that user?
- evilDagmar 9y agoThat has no bearing here because it's not the user mis-clicking on the link, but the app in question deliberately following a link on behalf of the user with the stated goal of causing harm.
- ImSkeptical 9y agoI would think there's a much stronger case for fraud against people who put misleading advertisements on their websites. Visiting a link automatically demonstrates an intent to protest advertisers, not defraud them.
- chii 9y agoFalse advertising is already against the law. You can protest legally by blocking ads, but there's such a thing as too much civil disobedience. Its a slippery slope, because this argument can be used to justify DDoS.