Technology

59374 readers

3767 users here now

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

Our Rules

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

Approved Bots

founded 1 year ago

MODERATORS

[email protected]

261

De-Google Your Life - Part 1 (piped.video)

submitted 5 months ago by [email protected] to c/[email protected]

99 comments fedilink hide all child comments

you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments

[–] [email protected] -3 points 5 months ago (1 children)

I've not argued any of those points. Just that not watching ads on YouTube is piracy.

In the UK, piracy isn't a legally defined term, and the way that I would define piracy as the illegitimate procurement of media.

[–] [email protected] 4 points 5 months ago

Right, and I'm arguing that it's not piracy. Piracy is a copyright violation, and blocking ads isn't violating copyright, it's only violating TOS. "Piracy" is the informal term for "copyright infringement," at least in my jurisdiction (US).

Here's a law stack exchange answer about it:

First the broad strokes: It's not illegal to block ads.

...

But... that doesn't mean your use of an adblocker isn't in violation of US law.

The crucial issue with legality when it comes to adblockers is less about blocking ads, and more about circumventing a websites measures to defeat adblockers.

So I might be violating the DMCA by circumventing protections on the website, depending on what exactly the ad-blocker is doing, but just blocking URLs isn't a copyright violation, it's a TOS violation, which may or may not hold up in court. Therefore, not piracy.