Across the internet, users rely on browsers and extensions to shape how they experience the web: to protect their privacy, improve accessibility, block harmful or intrusive content, and take control over what they see. But a recent ruling from Germany’s Federal Supreme Court risks turning one of these essential tools, the ad blocker, into a copyright liability — and in doing so, threatens the broader principle of user choice online.

    • rumba@lemmy.zip
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      7
      ·
      2 days ago

      ___________ seems to be speed-running becoming another shit-hole dystopian country

      I don’t know what the f happened It’s like somebody just flipped a stupid switch

  • Typhoon@lemmy.ca
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    18
    ·
    2 days ago

    A “copyright liability”?

    Another reason we need to overhaul patent/copyright law.

  • jojo@piefed.social
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    13
    ·
    edit-2
    2 days ago

    Sooooo, AI doesn’t violate copyright but ad blockers might do? That checks out for sure

    Edit: weird phrasing corrected to a bit less weird

  • polle@feddit.org
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    5
    ·
    2 days ago

    What’s not mentioned here is that the overall thing started because adblock plus is a addon by a company that is making money by selling it. This is not about ublock origin.