News for hackers. Stuff that matters.

A comment on Sourcepoint: Former Googler Will Sell Tech to Punch Through Ad Blockers. Parent comment

Re:Sourcepoint: Former Googler Will Sell Tech to Punch Throu... by wutbrodo on Thursday June 18, 2015 @07:09PM (#9742132)
In the scenario you just described (ie opting in to seeing ads)? I don't see how it would be. You could make the same argument in the following scenario: I buy a product with my credit (or debit) card and then ask my card issuer to not let the transaction go through (while not claiming fraud or anything). If the resolution was that the transaction was legitimate and is fulfilled, isn't that "unauthorized use of your account against your wishes for the benefit of another party"? Do you think that would be a crime (theft)?

When you're a grownup, when you agree to pay for a product (again, this scenario is opt in, by contrast to a lot of current content delivery), it's not a crime or unauthorized to enforce your end of the transaction that you agreed to. I never thought I'd have to explain that to someone over the age of ten.

[ Parent | on HN ]
Re:Sourcepoint: Former Googler Will Sell Tech to Punch Throu... by logn on Thursday June 18, 2015 @07:15PM (#9742167)
That's not the scenario I was referring to. The second quote was just to show the hypocrisy (of the scenario in the first quote).

What you're describing is covered by contract law I guess. Contracts can also be trumped by law. E.g., if you reply to this comment and don't click this link for a free iPad, http://www.vanderbilt.edu/innervu/news/win-a-free-ipad , then you owe me $100.

If a site wants to detect an ad blocker and block their own page too, fine. But if they want to circumvent it and silently download whatever resources they want and thwart all countermeasures they encounter, then that's cyber crime IMO.

[ Parent | on HN ]
Re:Sourcepoint: Former Googler Will Sell Tech to Punch Throu... by Nadya on Thursday June 18, 2015 @07:15PM (#9742160)
>"The publisher can also choose to circumvent the ad-blocking program and still present the ad."

That is not opting-in. That's the publisher forcing ads on the user without their permission.

[ Parent | on HN ]