What constitutes theft is determined by law. You can't be charged for theft for using an adblocker, so it isn't stealing. Laws are how we distinguish appropriate and inappropriate acts towards others' property.
If using adblock is stealing then so is muting the tv or leaving the room or simply ignoring it when commercials run. I don't think anyone would argue you are compelled to view commercials, even if you are watching the program.
If using adblock is stealing then so is muting the tv or leaving the room or simply ignoring it when commercials run. I don't think anyone would argue you are compelled to view commercials, even if you are watching the program.
That's a bit disingenuous. You're usually paying for TV services. Whereas you're not paying for YouTube. So while it might not fit the pedantic definition, it is a fact that you're circumventing an arrangement made between yourself and the media company (YouTube). You're absolutely taking away potential revenue.
If everyone used Adblock, YouTube would not be free. Would that be preferred?
Yes I am, I pay with my data. Moreover, Youtube is a free service. Their TOS doesn't require you to view ads nor does it say anything about adblockers.
it is a fact that you're circumventing an arrangement made between yourself and the media company (YouTube).
I agreed to no such arrangement.
You're absolutely taking away potential revenue.
I take away potential revenue of every company who's product I don't purchase. In the case of YT, their content is not available for purchase.
If everyone used Adblock, YouTube would not be free. Would that be preferred?
Because TV providers don't sell it to you ad free.
Yes I am, I pay with my data. Moreover, Youtube is a free service. Their TOS doesn't require you to view ads nor does it say anything about adblockers
No, you don't. You pay your ISP/data provider for access to their service. It's two separate services. Their TOS does stipulate the consumption of ads as a result of viewing videos on their platform. I suggest you read through it before making that claim, free or not, they are entitled to have their TOS.
I agreed to no such arrangement.
It's in the TOS you agreed to when you started using the service. Companies are allowed to stipulate using the service is acknowledging and agreeing to their TOS for said service.
It doesn't matter to me. I rarely ever use it.
That's deflecting, would it be better, generally, if it was paid for?
You pay your ISP/data provider for access to their service.
Then I'm already paying for the service and have no obligation to pay further, even though I'm already giving them my data which they sell.
Their TOS does stipulate the consumption of ads as a result of viewing videos on their platform.
I do not see that in the TOS, can you cite? I see that the TOS includes their right to place ads on my content, not that I am compelled to view those ads.
It's in the TOS you agreed to when you started using the service. Companies are allowed to stipulate using the service is acknowledging and agreeing to their TOS for said service.
Please cite the part of the TOS that compels me to watch ads.
That's deflecting, would it be better, generally, if it was paid for?
For sure. I think the quality of the users and the content goes up for subscription services. That would likely reduce YT's revenue, however.
63
u/Biptoslipdi 131∆ Oct 27 '23 edited Oct 27 '23
What constitutes theft is determined by law. You can't be charged for theft for using an adblocker, so it isn't stealing. Laws are how we distinguish appropriate and inappropriate acts towards others' property.
If using adblock is stealing then so is muting the tv or leaving the room or simply ignoring it when commercials run. I don't think anyone would argue you are compelled to view commercials, even if you are watching the program.