Comment on Mozilla warns Germany could soon declare ad blockers illegal
Filetternavn@lemmy.blahaj.zone 1 day ago
This is truly dystopian. A ruling in Springer’s favor here could imply that modifying anything, even without distribution, would constitute a copyright violation. Screen readers for blind people could be illegal, accessibility extensions for high contrast for those visually impaired could become illegal, even just extensions that change all websites to dark mode like Dark Reader could become illegal. What constitutes modification? Would zooming in on a website become illegal? Would translating a website to a different language become illegal? Where does this end?
This needs to be shot down.
New ubo feature: if page does not grant permission to block ads then entire page is blocked.
When I come across a paywall that is not circumvented by simple script blocking I don’t even bother to try anymore and I remove these suggestions from my feed.
Also, wouldn’t this ban also potentially kill or at the very least cripple FOSS too? And what about browser forks like LibreWolf or Icecat?
Because I could see this law overriding rights that basically all FOSS licenses grant to modify something as long as that modification is still freely available.
No, copyright holders have the right to provide permission for modification and distribution of their copyrighted material. This is a case where the copyright holder is not explicitly providing those rights, so it is a completely different scenario.
But ad blockers don’t distribute derivative materials.
It’s like saying you can’t distribute a stencil to cover up things you don’t like to see in a book.
Correct, this case (as far as I’m aware) is only about modification. I simply mentioned distribution and derivative works to talk about libre licenses like GPL being different than what the court case is about
Wouldn’t it make browsers illegal? They’re modifying the html code in order to present a webpage that if useful to the end user.
So far they have just re-opened the case for re-examination, on Springer’s behest. Yes, German corpos can sue as well.
Considering RIAA’s takedown of youtube-dl failed so miserably - argued in much the same way as this one - I think this case has little chance of even partial success.
In any case, it will take years to get results.
AFAIK, this is unlikely to lead to a ban on ad blockers. Worst case is probably that the judgment will imply some way to deliver ads that is illegal to block.
In any case, there are exemptions for certain assistive technologies. Those might not be much affected.
nymnympseudonym@lemmy.world 1 day ago
Dystopian, yes
Also Fascist
Something we never want to see in German politics in particular
Filetternavn@lemmy.blahaj.zone 1 day ago
I don’t see a reason to have a preference for a specific geographic region to not be influenced by fascism. Fascism should not be instituted anywhere, in any scenario. Unfortunately, it’s on the rise globally in many locations, and I’d personally prefer it not be present anywhere at all, not just in an area in which it has had previous influence.
nymnympseudonym@lemmy.world 1 day ago
It’s like cancer.
It’s never good. But when it’s already taken hold once, you want to be extra vigilant.
Deconceptualist@leminal.space 1 day ago
Right? It’s especially worth at least a second or even third glance in places that have a historical predilection to metastatic fascism.