Reply to post: Re: confused - - - -

Ad-blocker blocking websites face legal peril at hands of privacy bods

jaywin

Re: confused - - - -

Right, firstly, give up with the industry shill nonsense. Look through my previous posts, you'll see I'm a developer. I have with nothing to do with the advertising industry. I'm interested in this topic, the technical details of such, and your interpretations, and it'd be nice to get a sensible discussion out of that.

At no point did I say you were completely wrong - in fact I clearly said some behaviour - notably tracking and registering the presence of an adblocker would be covered by the directive. What I'm doing is questioning your assertions that all anti-adblock scripts are illegal. Now, if you'd like to explain to me why I'm wrong, that's fine, I'll happily admit you've spent a lot longer looking into this than me. But please give me a little more than "the big man told me I was right", and "everyone's opinions are worthless, but mine's right".

So...

> Javascript specifically developed to detect the use of an adblocker could never be considered as "for the sole purpose of carrying out or facilitating the transmission of a communication over an electronic communications network" - seriously where do you come up with this rubbish?

That's not what I said. I said the Javascript is only being executed from your computer because it's a necessary technical requirement, behaviour which is expressly permitted. If the page is set to no-cache, and is small enough, there's a reasonable chance it will never be stored locally apart from in RAM. And besides, the directive is talking about retrieving information from the user's equipment, which this behaviour is clearly not doing. It doesn't say anything about banning script activity that the user has moral objections against. Only those that may result in private information being transmitted.

It would be possible for me to write a piece of javascript, which would prevent someone from easily viewing content if they have an adblocker, but that doesn't reveal that to myself, or store that information anywhere. Please explain to me how that would cause any privacy implications to the visitors to that page, because I just can't see it. [Again, if I was sending that information back to myself, or storing it locally, I can see your point and agree that the directive would apply]. Forcing someone to view an advert also doesn't imply any privacy revelations [e.g. static advert served identically to everyone with nothing other than number of views being stored].

> Nothing is certain in law (that is why these are "test cases")

Well quite. Not that you would have gotten that impression from the rest of your post...

POST COMMENT House rules

Not a member of The Register? Create a new account here.

  • Enter your comment

  • Add an icon

Anonymous cowards cannot choose their icon