Gator-style Overlay Ads Are Legal, Says Court 436
donutz writes "C|Net has the scoop: "A federal court has ruled that pop-up ads for rivals of U-Haul International, placed atop the moving company's own site by a third-party software application, are legal." In this case, it was ad serving company WhenU.com placing the ads, but this decision could have a big impact on the court cases that involve competitor Gator."
Too bad it's so narrow... (Score:2, Funny)
Do you really want popups to be illegal? (Score:5, Insightful)
I'd generally rather see technical solutions, rather than legal ones, to problems on the 'Net. Legal solutions tend to not work well for mere annoyances (since people don't actually do anything, which results in laws that people simply ignore), simply cause more money to be thrown at lawyers, are slow to adapt with the times, may stifle honest-to-God positive things, tend to promote the deployment of "fragile" protocols/software (which may break when someone who doesn't care about the law comes along), and run into problems since legal boundaries (along cities, states, nations, etc) don't make much sense on the 'Net. If at all possible, I'd prefer to go with technical solutions to problems, to simply do things properly. Popups are a pretty easy thing to fix from a technical standpoint.
Just my 2 cents.
Re:Do you really want popups to be illegal? (Score:3, Insightful)
Well, I think that you're generally right about legal solutions not being appropriate. Uhaul shouldn't be able to have any say in what software people use or how it works...
On the other hand, there are a lot of problems with spyware for which legal solutions could be appropriate. For example, if a user does not agree to a spyware installation, but it is installed through some bug in activeX, the product that installs itself is really no better than say, someone who does a DOS attack (except
It's about setting the boundaries... (Score:3, Insightful)
"Choose to wear" is a different issue. In fact, I choose to run all the web pages I view through one of several filters, depending on what OS I happen to be using at the time. In theory, gator users have chosen gator as their "filter".
While I think gator is a PITA, I also think that anyone who does a little research will find it easy enought to not t
Re:Too bad it's so narrow... (Score:3, Insightful)
To insert them, it has to alter the HTML returned by a webserver as it passes through...essentially, it's a proxy server that munges content to insert ads. There are other proxy servers (WebWasher [webwasher.com] comes to mind as an example) that do the opposite--they examine the HTML they receive and alter it to remove ads, scripts, and other nastiness. Since your browser will also issue an HTTP GET request for the extra ads, ad-filtering proxies
The ads probably should be legal (Score:5, Insightful)
Re:The ads probably should be legal (Score:3, Interesting)
All those Gator like spyware pieces of software polute system. I don't care about the adds, but I'm seriously having problems with performance on machines that are condemed to be not knowingly used for advertising means more than anything else.
At least they should provide a way where user chooses his advertising agent like selecting your default browser in control panel. If it is selected then it us running, if it's not then "go away". That kind of agents woul
Re:The ads probably should be legal (Score:3, Insightful)
While at a friend's house, I noticed that he had an ad-agent of some sort installed (possibly, in fact, one that came from a pop-up blocker) which had the audacity to create a pop-up at a pace of about 1 every 3-5 minutes, possibly faster. While we sat away from t
Re:The ads probably should be legal (Score:5, Insightful)
A whole lot more than they are now.
Nowhere in the following does it say "We will replace ads with those from our subscribers at our discretion, and overlay ads from our subscribers on top of others' ads."
From the Gator front page:
"In return for receiving FREE software (often valued at up to $30), consumers agree to receive targeted promotions/ads from Gator advertisers through the Gator Advertising and Information Network (GAIN). GAIN occasionally displays various forms of pop up ads in a separate window on users' computer screens. These GAIN ads are displayed based on the interests of the computer user as reflected by their web surfing behavior and are not sponsored or endorsed by the web pages being viewed. The GAIN name and/or GAIN distinguishes GAIN ads from other ads."
It may be in there farther (I did not investigate deeper), but I doubt it.
Re:The ads probably should be legal (Score:5, Insightful)
separate might have a different meaning to you, but to me it does not mean "on top of", nor "replacing".
Someone has paid for an ad, in hopes that people will see it. Gator/GAIN overlays that content with their own.
Buy an ad in the Yellow Pages. Have a 3rd party then go through every copy, prior to delivery, and paste over your ad with one of theirs. You'd agree with this?
Re:The ads probably should be legal (Score:3, Interesting)
So, if you have a seperate window on top of your browser that covers an advert it's wrong? Gator doesn't replace anything, so you are just buying into the FUD.
Someone has paid for an ad, in hopes that people will see it. Gator/GAIN overlays that content with their own.
Because users have chosen to install Gator/GAIN on their systems. A user is free to do whatever they wish with their own computers
Re:The ads probably should be legal (Score:5, Insightful)
From e-commerce times [ecommercetimes.com] - August 2001:
"Last week, the advertising-supported service -- which has been installed by 8 million users -- launched an enhanced version that includes "Companion Pop-Up Banner" ad delivery software. According to Gator, the new vehicle "occasionally pops up to deliver a relevant advertisement" in a window that floats over existing banner ads on some Web pages. "
Because users have chosen to install Gator/GAIN on their systems.
Chosen? That is debatable. Mush as any EULA, what it actually does is shrouded in dense legalese, in a 20 char wide window. You know as well as I do that no one really reads those.
Users get targetted avertisements. Some of which overlay in a separate window on top of their web-browser.
'Separate window', directly and purposely in the space that the original website builder put his ad. I hate popups as much as the nextt guy. But personally, I think that is wrong. You don't. We shall just have to agree to disagree.
Re:The ads probably should be legal (Score:3, Insightful)
In a separate window, with a border and a distinguished name.
Chosen? That is debatable. Mush as any EULA, what it actually does is shrouded in dense legalese, in a 20 char wide window. You know as well as I do that no one really reads those.
Here's a challenge for you, if you are so confident that is what it is. Find a Gator installation
Re:The ads probably should be legal (Score:3, Insightful)
Actually, his analogy [reference.com] (not metaphor [reference.com]) was pretty bang-on.The ads are placed on top of existing ads. No, they are not identical situations, but sharing characteristics of one-another is the purpose of an analogy.
Re:The ads probably should be legal (Score:3, Insightful)
Re:The ads probably should be legal (Score:5, Interesting)
story time
I work at a LAN gaming center in Quebec, Canada, and you wouldn't believe the number of people that install wether checkers, time precision and other assorted crap on our computers. I have to run Lavasoft's ad-aware every night to keep things semi-clean. The thing is, when the pop-up installer apperars, they see "you time/date/sex dosen't appear to be exact, press yes to install our software that keeps it exact for you, sponsored by GAIN". They don't know what GAIN is, and when confronted with our "no installing software" policy, they plead that they only wanted to help us out in keeping our stuff right.
right
They need to put all the info out BEFORE they install the goddamn program. That and I need to install Mozilla everywhere...
Re:The ads probably should be legal (Score:4, Informative)
Re:The ads probably should be legal (Score:3, Informative)
Re:The ads probably should be legal (Score:3, Informative)
Re:The ads probably should be legal (Score:5, Informative)
Accurate Windoze Time (Score:4, Informative)
I didn't realize this until recently: Win2K has a built-in NTP client. If you are on an NT domain or other corporate LAN, this has probably already been set up for you:
There. No cheesy spy-ware necessary. Also, performance-conscious gamers needn't worry. NTP synchronization requires, at worst, perhaps one packet per hour to keep things straight.
Schwab
Re:The ads probably should be legal- FIREWALLS (Score:3, Informative)
Indeed. Configure your firewall to do transparent squid, and then put the following into your squid.conf:
The real question the judge should answer... (Score:5, Funny)
Re:The real question the judge should answer... (Score:5, Insightful)
It comes in the background with KaZaa or some other P2P shit or even on those nefarious websites that download software by praying on the "click OK" instinct that everybody has on the Internet
Re:The real question the judge should answer... (Score:5, Insightful)
IANAL, but I seem to recall that for there to be a contract, both parties must knowingly consent to it, and there must be consideration (value) in both directions. If in fact gator is installed surreptitiously, and if gator.com knows this and fails to take measures to prevent it, I think a case could be made that they are in guilty of trademark infringement by placing pop-ups that fraudulently appear to be condoned by the unwitting website beneath them.
Or maybe not. *shrugs*
Comment removed (Score:4, Interesting)
Re:The real question the judge should answer... (Score:5, Insightful)
Maybe Judges, legislators, etc, would consider the consequences a little more if every half hour they get a pop-up on their screen with words similar to "You're an ass!", "Screw you, loser", and "Rebooting now, and there's nothing you can do about it either, because YOU agreed to the EULA, moron!"
So, a virus would be legal so long as it had a click this EULA?
UNREAL!
On the upside, this ruling also would seem to make it completely legal to use AD BLOCKING software, as well as browsers that block popups.
I use Opera, and frankly get AMAZED how shitty the web is when IE is used.
Re:The real question the judge should answer... (Score:2, Insightful)
You're right, this software does prey on the ordinary person's lack of computer knowledge. I have gotten to play the "hero" many times by clearing off gator, bonzai buddy, etc. for friends and family and "miraculously" speeding up their machine for them. I am also probably the worst driver I know. But you gotta agree, taking cheapshots at people w
fr1st l3gal ps0t (Score:4, Interesting)
-uso.
Re:fr1st l3gal ps0t (Score:5, Funny)
Re:fr1st l3gal ps0t (Score:2, Insightful)
If you wore rose coloured glasses, and the linux ads were in red but MS ones in blue, would be have to ban those too?
This happens on Cable TV all the time (Score:4, Insightful)
Re:This happens on Cable TV all the time (Score:5, Informative)
The difference here is that U-Haul has no relationship with WhenU at all... they'd rather WhenU simply go away.
Re:This happens on Cable TV all the time (Score:3, Informative)
It is nowhere near the same.. gator doesnt pay anyone squat.
Taking matters into our own hands.... (Score:5, Funny)
Or, someone should hack the adware sites so they put an ad over Microsoft's web page. Then Microsoft will hear about it, get pissed, and start bundling some kind of program to get a rid of the AdWare (just hope that it's not DRM).
consider the implications (Score:3, Insightful)
Imagine watching a Nascar race and seeing the "home depot" car with the "Home Depot" logo covered by the "Target" logo via software. I really am not sure what the legal difference between TV and Computer screens would be. My cable company may be the next purveyor of "ads"....
Re: (Score:3, Interesting)
Re:consider the implications (Score:5, Interesting)
Similarly, the owners of the real Times Square billboards complained that the recent Spiderman movie went to painstaking steps to recreate Times Square in their computer animations, but their billboards were forgotten and replaced with virtual billboards that were sold by by the moviemakers. They went to court telling about how much money they paid to obtain their billboard placements and how much it meant to them... and then they got laughed out of court.
Re:consider the implications (Score:2)
Re:Taking matters into our own hands.... (Score:5, Interesting)
Re:Taking matters into our own hands.... (Score:2)
No they won't. They'll opt to "embrace and extend" the pop-up industry with bigger, more annoying and buggier versions of the same.
Re:Taking matters into our own hands.... (Score:3, Interesting)
UNTIL...
I got married, and briefly used IE again until I installed Moz1.4 on the wife's PC. Man, THIS must be what everybody's so mad about. The ads are EVERYWHERE these days. It's out of control.
I used to feel like it was stealing content, viewing websites and blocking ads, depriving them of
Sensible (Score:3, Insightful)
I can replace ads with pictures of the countryside or kittens, so why not ads with different ads if I so choose, it's my desktop.
Re:Sensible (Score:5, Interesting)
It's like having something on your TV that replaces Pepsi with Coke in every Pepsi commercial you see. Pepsi would have every right to be annoyed and probably sue since they - not the adaware client - paid for the timeslot.
Re:Sensible (Score:4, Interesting)
All of the multi-million dollar commercials are replaced by local retailers and companies, because the cable provider has changed the commercials.
Occasionally, even the billboards on the stadium walls are changed to retailers of a Canadian nature.
Re:Sensible (Score:4, Insightful)
And there's the real problem. You see, the courts can't protect people from their own stupidity. How about somebody telling people to actually read an EULA once in a while... I'm sure we can get a few GPL zealots to help with this one.
Re:Sensible (Score:3, Insightful)
users don't agree, they are tricked into accepting (Score:3, Interesting)
Re:users don't agree, they are tricked into accept (Score:5, Insightful)
Why not? (Score:2)
On the other hand, I have a hard time believing that anyone would willingly sign up to be hit with more advertisements without getting hardly anything in return. Oh well.
Fake Windows messages (Score:5, Interesting)
The pop-up ads that bother me the most are the ones that look like Windows dialog boxes. You know - "Warning, your computer is too slow, click here..."
It's not like I've ever fallen for one, nor do I think many other /.ers have (They don't look right on Gnome or KDE).
The problem is that some of the "normal" people on the internet can't tell the difference until its too late. My dad is barely computer literate to open and save an excel file (only excel!). He would fall for one of those immediately
My main concern is that some of these may be used to activate some scripts or something. Once again, those who fell for the boxes probably use Internet Explorer. Need I say more?
Re:Fake Windows messages (Score:5, Informative)
Google AdSense (Score:3, Interesting)
Now I'm of the opinion Internet ad systems are a doomed system no matter what. The Internet is supposed to be this concept of freedom and availability, which conflicts with commercialism that companies have tried to infect it with si
Impacting Consumer Decisions (Score:5, Insightful)
Re:Impacting Consumer Decisions (Score:2)
If you want to block more in-page ads, try following this page:
http://www.accs-net.com/hosts/
and list the servers that host the banner ads in your hosts file pointing to 127.0.0.1
what if... (Score:5, Interesting)
and another...
you get the point, sounds kind of funky to me
Re:what if... (Score:2)
Re:what if... (Score:5, Interesting)
Aparently, in the negotiations with the software developers, it was very important to be the last spyware package installed during the install process as that could ensure that their spyware package could control the users search bar and other aspects of their browser. He showed me the test computer he installed everything on and typed a non-url into his address bar in IE. For approximately 10 seconds, the screen flashed and the browser did nothing as it attempted to figure out which spyware package was to control the response to his request. The idea that people live with this sickens me.
Re:what if... (Score:3, Interesting)
I discovered that hotbar had hijacked their IE & outlook. Every time they sent an email, or clicked on a site, hotbar would try and call home, only th
Gator's in an amazing position. (Score:5, Interesting)
Since they can now edit web pages as they see fit (basically), sites don't have to get hacked, and this is all legal.
Why not have gator outright block pages, or slow them down. They can do what they want. This may turn into a bidding war. Your company's website is useless now, because a competitor can take control over it.
Sigh... and, now the Slashdot version:
1. Control Websites
2. ???
3. Profit!!!
Re:Gator's in an amazing position. (Score:2, Interesting)
Re:Gator's in an amazing position. (Score:5, Insightful)
2. ???
3. Profit!!!
How about:
1. Control Websites.
2. Try to get companies to pay so their websites aren't shut down.
3. A little profit, and a lot of complaints.
4. Get sued.
5. Go out of business.
I sure hope so at least
Re:Gator's in an amazing position. (Score:5, Funny)
why don't site defacers hack the Gator ad database or create a worm that takes over the Gator client? Then their defacements could be much more interesting!
Spyware Ads (Score:5, Insightful)
-Placing icons on the desktop that launch ad-filled web pages
-Adding itself as a favorite or a home page to the browser
-Adding shortcuts to the Start Menu
All without permission of the user. Granted, those who are security-aware will have unsigned ActiveX and Scripting capabilities turned off (discussion of this can be found here [dslreports.com], but then again, the crowd that is more concerned with these types of exploits will use browsers that are harder to exploit and easier to control, such as Mozilla [mozilla.org], Opera [opera.com], or Communicator [netscape.com]. Not that these programs are all exempt from exploitation, but they have proven to be a much smaller target audience.
Of course they're legal... (Score:5, Funny)
This is a Bad Thing™ (Score:5, Insightful)
Think about it this way. You have a business selling computer parts. Someone goes to your site, and then all of the sudden they get a popup ad going straight to a competitor of yours. This can hamper your ability to make a sale with your customer and impacts you financially. It's a Bad Thing(TM).
It isn't right, and it is unfortunate that the judge ruled this way.
Re:This is a Bad Thing™ (Score:2)
What this business (and all of the others bothered by this tactic) need to do is to educate the masses about how they've been tricked by agreeing to an EULA they didn't read, and now have a bad program that they didn't mean to install on their computer. Organize a mass uninstall of WhenU and Gator's clients, and those companies suddenly
WHO has "the scoop?" (Score:5, Informative)
If you want news, go to the source.
Thinking on paper.. (Score:5, Interesting)
Let's think about this for a second.
copyright, while the owners of the site can easily claim copyright on any copy, images, etc.. they can't seem to control copyright on the layout of the site by viewing this site. The fact that an ad is on a website doesn't make the layout and presentation a non-copyrighted object. On the other hand, doesn't the fact that the page is thrust into the public domain give everyone the ability to manipulate the content as they see fit?
license, if a site specifically had you enter into an agreement to view the site, and within the agreement you agree not to edit the layout and presentation of said site, then the fact that you installed gator on your system (how dumb) would violate the agreement and put the you in breach of the terms. Much like a physical establishment grants you license to enter their place of business. If you began posting ads in the store, you would be kicked out. Ahh.. but the catch is.. what if you are the only one that can see that ads? Then your not in violation of the license are you?
Very tricky in my opinion, but I opt to go with:
Users should have the right to replace ANYTHING they see while browsing using 3rd party tools, unless they specifically enter into an agreement with the content owners.
The courts worked in this case, much like they worked for Larry Flynt.
Re: (Score:2)
wow... (Score:5, Insightful)
Gee, and here I was thinking is was my workspace!?!
just goes to show how these guys think eh?
You can bet they will be infecting linux soon. (Score:5, Funny)
Re:You can bet they will be infecting linux soon. (Score:5, Funny)
gator@gatorlux.ford: vi main.java
Emacs is the extensible, customizable, self-documenting real-time display editor. http://www.gnu.org/software/emacs/
gator@gatorlux.ford: javac main.java
Don't throw out your existing systems. Microsoft
http://www.microsoft.com/net/
I sort of still have a problem here... (Score:2)
So my problem is this...(UHaul case aside) could allowing changes to the site by third party software be denying companies the funds they deserve for providing the service? Each vi
The problem with gator style "pop overs" (Score:3, Interesting)
In my opinion this is a big defeat for free information (as in beer). If this does not get overruled than many websites that are supported by web advertising will have to charge money or go out of business.
It should lose on the appeal (Score:3, Insightful)
How long before someone builds spyware that rearranges the content to put ads where there weren't any ads before?
Of course, I thought Disney would've lost for the non-ending patent rights.
Even sleazy people deserve freedom (Score:3, Interesting)
While it may be that Gator now 0wnz the desktop, the person nevertheless gave control over to the program -- a sort of "power of attorney" was granted to the adware by the user. They may have been fooled, but that's a far cry from the nonsense being alleged by uhaul or anyone else. They aren't trying to protect users from being suckered, they just want their monopoly on suckering^H^H^H, I mean, advertising to people.
I think that maybe adware (all software, really) should be properly labeled so that users know what they are clicking yes to. Perhaps we should have mandatory labeling for software similar to nutritional labeling required for food. I want to know what's in it and what it does. I want specifics on files, registry settings, TCP ports, drivers, services/daemons, and so on. Now, some may say that they can't disclose some info because of fears of IP protection or trade secrets. However, that isn't a valid defense to not disclosing the ingredients to a twinkie, and it shouldn't be on hiding the actions of an application.
Does anyone ever look at ads to care? (Score:2)
Even computer illiterates learn quickly to ignore flashing ads.
And actually this hijacking of ads should be encouraged! IF the same ads are repeated over and over again you get used to them quicker and ignore them quicker.
In the 9 or so years being online I can only recall clicking intentionally on a banner ad once.
Lets make them pay by doing this.. (Score:5, Informative)
127.0.0.1 www.gator.co.uk
127.0.0.1 www.gator.com
127.0.0.1 www.gator.net
127.0.0.1 webdp.gator.com
127.0.0.1 whenu.com
127.0.01 gator.com
This will fix their wagon quite thoroughly, until they switch their domain addresses, then reopen your hosts file and repeat..
I've got a little hosts file (only 22K) that pretty much takes care of all of the jokers that push ads upon you by replacing their ads with a quaint DNS error.
Let me know if you want a copy of the file.
Re:Lets make them pay by doing this.. (Score:3, Funny)
I have heard talk of a peer-2-peer application that would allow me to click on an ad and then select "block" from a list. Every hour, my block list gets circulated around the internet. Eventualy, a master list evolves that effectively blocks every advertisement from every page on the internet.
There are 2 problems I can see wit
Pop goes the weasel (Score:2)
and dead goes gator when consumers sue for illegal computer access..:)
spyware is still somewhat illegal foolks
want to kill a gator today?
The crux of the matter. (Score:5, Insightful)
I run a business, my ad is in the yellow pages along with everybody else who is in the same line of work. Why is it that despite the fact that I am surrounded by the ads of others (mostly bigger than mine) I have a larger market share in my area? A rhetorical question to which I'm sure we all know the answer to, my service is better and my prices are fair.
The decision to use a company is still based on choices made on the basis of information provided... NOT on the the basis of 'I saw you first'. You cannot call "Shotgun" in the business world and expect everybody to agree. The solution for these companies is to make sure that people still choose their service or product, even after they have been exposed to all the other available options. This is the USA, there is never going to be someone telling you that you are not allowed to be the best.
Go ahead run your ads anywhere you like in my local yellow pages. My company is the best. If these companies cant handle the competition then maybe they should check what they can do better within their company rather than attempting to call 'shotgun' and make their competitors go away!
Billboard (Score:5, Interesting)
Re:Billboard (Score:3, Insightful)
Re:Billboard (Score:3, Insightful)
However, if I design a windshield that detects the presence of your billboards and superimposes another image over it, such that your billboard has a different message, that's fine. The only difference is, it's a lot easier to do this online than in real life.
-Restil
Re:Billboard (Score:3, Interesting)
More like a garage who surreptously replaces windshields of cars brought in for repairs with "special HUD enhanced" windshields that electronically alter the contents of highway-side billboards seen through it.
Or a sleezy salesmen that sells X-ray glasses. However, the glasses won't allow you to see the babes naked, but instead just substitude the billboard ads you look at.
Worrying (Score:3, Interesting)
However, the text presented to the user comes from the component author, and every time I've come across Gator it's along the lines of '"Date/Time checker, a program that blah blah blah enhances your internet experience blah blah blah" by Gator Corporation.' NO MENTION of replacing or adding ads to web pages.
Sure, it doesn't say that Gator doesn't do anything else, but I don't see how this is any different than, say, yet another chain mail which also happens to mail itself to everyone in your mailbox automatically. The primary purpose of the software is hostile and hidden to the user installing it, which is about as 'trojan horse' as you can get.
Huh? (Score:5, Funny)
How to beat Gator for good? (Score:3, Interesting)
What they can do, and what MS has proved is definitely technologically feasible with Opera and MSN.com, is redirect users detected using Gator and similar software. Currently, probably half of the people who visit these sites and load a different page than others, thanks to Gator, probably have no idea their computer is infected. THESE people are the ones the companies are suing Gator over because the customers have no idea they are getting a "false" image of the company's site.
If users with ad-changing spyware were redirected to a page similar to the ones people using third-party browser (not MIE or Netscape) frequently get on major sites, a page that said something to the effect of "You have software installed that may prevent the proper viewing of the site" and then named exactly what was messing things up, I would bet that a lot more action would be taken against spyware. People would be aware that their Internet is filtered and hijacked, and they would do something about it. Currently, I doubt future court rulings will be different until the technology and method of presenting/counter popups and ads changes radically.
Can this ruling be extended to DVRs? (Score:3, Interesting)
1) Get Coca-Cola to pay my company mucho bucks to "popup" a Diet Coke ad everytime the TV viewer was supposed to see a Diet Pepsi ad?
3) Profit!
What about users customizing their DVRs to play content they _prefer_ instead of the ads they were going to see? (ie, show me those beer babes fighting in the fountain ad everytime that lame shampoo commercial comes on).
Or how about allowing the user to automatically skip commercials altogether? ... Err ... Whoops [slashdot.org]
seems very simple... (Score:3, Interesting)
How does this differ from blocking ads entirely? (Score:3, Interesting)
Now, as to the issue of the click through license -- I wonder what other way we could do such a thing? Perhaps legal mandates stating that all applications / tools / utilities from 3rd parties must be plainly presented the user? The problem, of course, is that this would be a local (at best) solution, and, it would, I think, just create some wierd variant of that type of advertisements, probably doing more harm than good.
The decision is OK, sort of (Score:3, Insightful)
Users who have Gator on their machines against their will may have a computer intrusion case, under federal "exceeds authorized access" computer crime laws, but that wasn't what was litigated here.
Re:Oh cool! (Score:5, Insightful)
However, If you buy a magazine, you are perfectly free to paste any other ads over the ads printed in your copy of the magazine. After all, it's your property.
Re:Oh cool! (Score:5, Interesting)
Re:This is why ... (Score:3, Insightful)
Can you say broad generalization?
The rest of the world hates the US because we are the last remaining super power.. and every unpopular kid on the block wants to de-thrown the king.
Re:This is why ... (Score:5, Insightful)
Here's why this decision is good. If third party software is allowed to replace the ads on a web page, then it is certainly legal for you to remove ads from the web pages you see. This decision strongly protects ad-blocking software, and that's a good thing.
Re:This is why ... (Score:2)
Please post your anti-bussines flamebait in a more appropriate discussion.
Re:Wow (Score:3, Interesting)
The internet actually getting more free as I see it. As the prices for high speed c
Re:Is This Still Legal? (Score:4, Interesting)
It would seem to me that adjusting a hosts file is even more on affirmative decision on the part of the user. Of course, when you run your own ad server, slashdot doesn't generate an ad impression. Theoretically, some of these services might allow a ad impression, but subsequently overlay that ad with another. Slashdot still gets paid, but the correct advertisement never shows up.
The latter system could be construed (by a sufficiently aggrieved advertiser) as fraud. Eventually, though, rates for banner ads will decline even more, depriving advertiser supported sites of much needed revenue. Presumably, that's why the Washington Post sued Gator (and won a preliminary injunction [findlaw.com] last year-- from the same court, to boot)