You are viewing a single thread.
View all comments
116 points
*

unless it is strictly necessary for the provisions of the requested service.

YouTube could quite easily argue that ads fund their service and therefore an adblock detector would be necessary.

permalink
report
reply
3 points

That’s a very good point. I’m not very aware of EU regulations, I wonder if there has been established precedent in court

permalink
report
parent
reply
48 points

Adblock detection has literally already been ruled on though (it needs consent). I’m sure there are nuances above my understanding, but it’s not that simple.

permalink
report
parent
reply
-11 points

You consent to their terms of service and privacy policy when you access their website by your continued use. They disclose the collection of browser behavior and more in the privacy policy. I suspect they are covered here but I don’t specialize in EU policy.

permalink
report
parent
reply
39 points

Their terms of service have to be compliant with local laws though. You can’t just put whatever you want in there and expect it to stand up in court.

permalink
report
parent
reply
6 points

I haven’t agreed to any new terms and the adblocker appears for me

permalink
report
parent
reply
12 points
*
Removed by mod
permalink
report
parent
reply
10 points

Blargerer is probably saying that because the Mastodon post OP linked to says “In 2016 the EU Commission confirmed in writing that adblock detection requires consent.”

That, in turn, is probably referring to a letter received from the European Commission by the same person, which you can see here: https://twitter.com/alexanderhanff/status/722861362607747072

It’s not exactly a “ruling”, but it’s still pretty convincing.

permalink
report
parent
reply
176 points

that’s not how it is to be interpreted.
it means something like in order for google maps to show you your position they NEED to access your device’s gps service, otherwise maps by design can not display your position.

permalink
report
parent
reply
149 points

Correct. Youtube can still play videos on your screen on a technical level without the need for adblocker detection. Their financial situation is not relevant in that respect.

permalink
report
parent
reply
42 points

Correct. Youtube can still play videos on your screen on a technical level without the need for adblocker detection. Their financial situation is not relevant in that respect.

This is why I’ve never had an issue blocking ads. Pick a couple creators you like, join their patreon or buy some merch. You owe YT nothing.

permalink
report
parent
reply
43 points

Just replying to confirm that “strictly necessary” has never meant, “makes us money.” It means technically necessary.

permalink
report
parent
reply
-7 points

Call me naive, but doing something illegal is never OK in the eyes of the law, whether I deem it necessary or not. I would have to receive a legal exception to the rule, as it were. As it stands, it’s illegal.

permalink
report
parent
reply
8 points

doing something illegal is never OK in the eyes of the law

yeah, doing something illegal is illegal, hard to argue with that tautology.

but you seem to be living under the impression that immoral = illegal, which is not the case.

permalink
report
parent
reply
4 points

I think what they were saying is that the law specifically makes exceptions for things that are necessary. Others are saying ads are not necessary per the law’s definition, but that’s a separate issue.

permalink
report
parent
reply
0 points

Saving Jews during the holocaust in Germany was illegal. How naive are you?

permalink
report
parent
reply
9 points

Their precedent is that they sold our data for 20 years before this and are now the biggest company in the world, so they can go pound sand.

permalink
report
parent
reply
6 points

In the interest of making criticisms factually correct, they don’t “sell” user data, they make money through targeted advertising using user data. They actually benefit by being the only ones with your data, it’s not in their interest to sell it.

permalink
report
parent
reply
16 points
*

Also required should be YouTube accepting liability for damage done by malicious ads or hacks injecting malware onto user systems via ad infrastructure.

permalink
report
parent
reply
-4 points

Why wouldn’t the hacker just be liable instead?

permalink
report
parent
reply
4 points

Because Google is the one trying to force consumers to raw dog the internet.

permalink
report
parent
reply

Technology

!technology@lemmy.world

Create post

This is a most excellent place for technology news and articles.


Our Rules


  1. Follow the lemmy.world rules.
  2. Only tech related content.
  3. Be excellent to each another!
  4. Mod approved content bots can post up to 10 articles per day.
  5. Threads asking for personal tech support may be deleted.
  6. Politics threads may be removed.
  7. No memes allowed as posts, OK to post as comments.
  8. Only approved bots from the list below, to ask if your bot can be added please contact us.
  9. Check for duplicates before posting, duplicates may be removed

Approved Bots


Community stats

  • 15K

    Monthly active users

  • 13K

    Posts

  • 568K

    Comments