Firefox AdBlock Foe Calls For Mozilla Boycott

[didymus]

tinyurl.com/2pjdle

** Firefox AdBlock Foe Calls For Mozilla Boycott**

A Web designer who claims that Firefox’s AdBlock Plus utility encourages online behavior that’s tantamount to content theft is calling for a boycott of the popular Internet browser. “I’m standing up for something I believe is right,” said Danny Carlton, who has launched a Web site called WhyFirefoxIsBlocked.com.

Carlton, who is based in Oklahoma, said AdBlock Plus deprives online publishers of legitimate revenue and allows users to steal content on the sly. “AdBlock Plus does not allow me to detect it, so it’s denying me control over my Web sites,” said Carlton.

Carlton said AdBlock Plus can’t easily be blocked individually by Web publishers, so he’s calling on them to block all Internet users arriving at their sites through the Firefox browser until Mozilla stops supporting the utility.

The issue recalls the debate over whether it’s immoral for TiVo users to fast forward through network commercials, though Carlton said the cases aren’t entirely similar. “TiVo doesn’t force you to fast forward if you don’t want to,” he said, noting that AdBlock Plus’ only function is to block ads.

So does this guy have a point?
I’ve been using Firefox with AdBlock for years & I never considered it stealing. But if someone depends on ad clicks for revenue and you take away the ads . . .

Have to think about that one.

 

[Leopard]

…The issue recalls the debate over whether it’s immoral for TiVo users to fast forward through network commercials, though Carlton said the cases aren’t entirely similar. “TiVo doesn’t force you to fast forward if you don’t want to,” he said…

Firefox doesn’t force users not to view ads either. Adblock is an extension that users may install or not.

 

[Saul.Tentmaker]

Firefox doesn’t force users not to view ads either. Adblock is an extension that users may install or not.

Also, even with Adblock, a notice is sent that an ad has been blocked, so a person wanting to look at the ads would be free to do so.

No essential difference from Tivo.

How petty!

If people wish to block Firefox, that is their freedom. I will simply deign not to frequent their sites.

As for the case of whether theft exists, as theft is defined as the unlawful taking of property, and as our nation has not set up comprehensive advertising rights, as they are relevant to the internet, it cannot be stealing, for there is yet no law.

Maybe there should be, but that is a matter for the legislators, and not the internet users.

It may violate what should be positive law, for the sake of the State, but I cannot find any sense in which avoiding often pornographic advertisements would be a violation of Natural Law.

 

[melensdad]

But if someone depends on ad clicks for revenue and you take away the ads . . .

If you DON’T use AdBlock and you DON’T click on the ads then they receive no revenue.

If you DO use AdBlock and you DON’T see the ads, and therefor you don’t click on them, the result is the same, they receive no revenue.

YOU choose to click on the ads. I never click on ads on any sites I visit, even the website where I am a moderator. I have a choice and the content providers also have a choice. They can provide the content free, with some restrictions or even can choose to make their sites pay only sites. You can choose to support the site, support the advertisers of the site, or not to support either/both. It is done without AdBlock, and it is done with AdBlock.

This is not a moral issue. The guy who doesn’t like AdBlock, however, may be throwing up a disingenuous arguement to try to make people believe they are doing some wrong by not supporting him. If he had content or product worthy of support he’d be driving his Mercedes to the bank to make a deposit and not complaining at all.

 

[Matt_Collins]

The day Firefox STOPS supporting these types of extensions is the day I will stop using Firefox and encouraging others to use it. Saying it’s immoral for Firefox to refuse to show popup ads is like saying its immoral to sign up on the “Do Not Call” registry to avoid getting calls from phone solicitors.

I think the guy who’s boycotting Firefox needs to worry about all the real injustices going on in the world and stop inventing new ones.

 

[KarenElissa]

Ya, I don’t really agree with this either. For one, like many others have mentioned, I don’t click on ads even when I do see them, so not seeing them isn’t changing my behavior any, just helping my pages load faster without all the crazy graphics.

And blocking ads isn’t even anywhere close to the top of the reasons that I use Firefox. Sure, it is a nice bonus, but even without Adblock Plus, I would still continue using FF. So blocking all my traffic to your website just because I use FF isn’t going to stop me from using it. It will only stop me from visiting your website!