3 ms·
These companies can and do exist, the onus is put onto the user to not submit materials they don't have permission/rights to print or share. This would be a lit
by Mandatum 13y ago
These companies can and do exist, the onus is put onto the user to not submit materials they don't have permission/rights to print or share. This would be a little hard for printing personalized news websites that remove ads however..
- hamburglar 13y agoI don't know, it doesn't seem so cut and dried to me. I can print out web pages for my own personal use, and I can even run adblock while I do it. Can I remotely print them at my personal assistant's office and ask him to deliver them to me? It seems like the very specific personal use case for the content could provide a lot of wiggle room for lawyerin' if they really wanted to pursue it.
- Mandatum 13y agoI agree but it likely wouldn't be worth the hassle. Technically they're taking content for different sources, stripping ads and reselling the content in a different media format. It'd be akin to recording a song off of the radio, removing ad breaks and selling it as a CD/downloadable MP3. Law may differ with publications and citing sources however.
- MichaelGG 13y agoIs it legal to record songs from the radio to a CD, even for personal use? If not then it's not like what they're doing at all. If it's legal to print a page your browser renders, then it should be legal to have someone else run the printer for you. "Removing ad breaks" is a simple browser function. It's an interesting business (not that I have that much use for paper printouts of web pages) and this article does a poor job of explaining why it should be shut down. Terrible attitude, too.