This is huge: turns out adblock blockers are illegal in the EU under the same law that prevents websites from setting cookies etc. without explicit consent:
https://twitter.com/alexanderhanff/status/722861362607747072
>thank you based EU for trying to protect consumer rights, although you usually do it through pants-on-head-retarded laws
>>54185139
I read about this and saw the document photos. Amerikeks BTFO.
Feels good to European!
Based EU
The sites that block ad-blockers are also the same sites that are least likely to care about some EU ruling
>>54185174
Major news outlets? They will care.
>>54185184
I don't know any major news outlets in my country (Italy) that block ad-blockers.
>>54185139
based Europe
>>54185233
It's slowly spreading here in Denmark, more and more news websites are using it or moving to paid subscriptions.
Doesn't this completely buttfuck google and the likes as well?
>they were very clear that ANY attempt to store or access stored information requires informed & specific consent so even serverside scripts which collect information from a users device is covered under this formal opinion #adblocking #privacy #spyware
>>54185139
This is actually very good news from a privacy standpoint.
>>54185278
a a r h u s
first time in months i've been justified in being proud of being EU
>>54186630
Enjoy your new Caliphate.
Unless you are from Poland. In that case, congrats for having a great country.
>>54185174
>The sites that block ad-blockers
...are also the same ones where I press ctrl+w immediately after loading.
>>54186630
ahmed, pls
Legalbro here.
A law is only a law if the highest court said so.
>>54185278
give me a link to one
>>54185139
I guess it is illegal to have javascript disabled in the EU
heck it must be illegal to have a browser not support images as well
>>54186756
>I guess it is illegal to have javascript disabled in the EU
Why?
>>54185139
I first read the headline as "adblockers are illegal in the EU", and nearly shit myself with rage.
I've gotta learn to quit overreacting.
>>54187264
I also read it wrong and started to rage. Thank god it's actually good news.
>>54185139
>in other news
The EU is ready to bring in another 50 million niggers and mudshits because muh ethnic food and WHO IS GONNA TAKE ALL THIS WELFARE?
>>54187209
Because he read the OP wrong.
>>54186738
bild.de
>>54185139
fuck the EU. I'm glad we're voting to leave in June.
I don't give a shit if ad blockers are "illegal". At least I don't have to put up with troublesome ad banners and popups because of it
>>54187488
NICE READING COMPREHENSION NERD
>>54186679
How you tell Poland is so great?
>>54187488
Read the OP again
>>54185139
>adblock
I never use that thing. It's useless.
>>54187520
NICE READING COMPREHENSION NERD
>>54187512
I don't need to read an article to have an opinion on a subject. Go crybaby to someone else if you care so much about it.
>>54187533
>I don't need to read an article to have an opinion on a subject.
But you need a fucking brain and learn to read.
>>54187488
kill yourself
>>54187514
White nationalist country which is against mass Islamic immigration and social benefits.
>>54187516
>Read the OP again
the EU operates through incompetent red tape and garbage legislation. What else is new?
>>54187533
>I don't need to read an article to have an opinion on a subject.
You can't even read a header, of course you wouldn't read an entire article.
>>54185139
for a second I thought you were saying adblockers were illegal in the EU
>>54187551
Nah, mate. If I did I wouldn't be able to enjoy going on websites and not be bombarded with popups full of viruses advertising viagra pills.
>>54187488
>old futurama image macro.jpg
>inb4 thread gets derailed over political commentary
pls I already have to suffer enough I just come here for somewhat tech-related memes and anime and don't want to rage over political bullshit
>>54187613
this board is complete shit, I suggest you go elsewhere
>>54187570
And the UK is such a competent and efficient place, ruled by Sharia laws.
All that the UK contributed to the EU was negociating special status for themselves. Which makes sense, since they are Uncle Sam's pawn in the EU. So they're better off if they leave.
>>54187468
>bild.de
Nothing with ublock my friend Anders
I use adblock and couldn't live without it. If a website doesn't like that I'm using it and blocks its content, I won't use that website. I have the freedom to not use that website, and that website has the freedom to not provide service to me.
If a company invests money into providing a service, I don't see the problem with them at least having the option to block people who are mooching (including myself)
What value do these nanny state regulations add?
>>54187752
Because they are running a script to check for those adblockers. Those scripts can't run without your permission. Stop acting like choking on corporate cock somehow makes you pro freedom or anti nanny state.
>>54187752
It ends up becoming a problem if this in turn creates censorship in journalism.
Journalism needs to be free for all to see. If these things start being behind a paywall, society is in deep problems and journalism will only be for the rich.
I know you people dont care about society that much, but the majority of people still live in it.
>>54185139
So instead of having a popup nagging you to disable adblock on their website they straight out put it behind a paywall, great
>>54187468
It detected my ublock & blocked me
>>54185139
Damn, it feels good to be a (natural born) European.
>>54185139
Then they should make adblock blocker blockers
>>54185139
>adblock blockers are illegal in the EU
Very nice, they need to fuck off.
>>54187613
This is one of the worst boards in all of 4chan. I know, I've been lurking every single day and have only noticed a significant drop in quality. I blame the generals, the normalfaggots, and stupid side mentality.
>>54187514
Read a history book
>>54187613
/g is right next to /v in terms of being filled with shit
>>54188334
>This is one of the worst boards in all of 4chan. I know, I've been lurking every single day
same here yet I keep coming back
maybe I'm masochistic idk
>>54188234
Requiring JavaScript is perfectly legal.
As is using client side JavaScript to check if your ads are loading.
Only server side adblocker detection is illegal.
>>54185139
Adblocker blockers are not storing personal information so they are not illegal.
The twitter handle on the OP seems to be some bullshit artist.
>>54187468
anyone with a bit of a brain shouldn't read anything Springer prints anyway
total waste of time
I'm actually happy they stop me from reading their absolute garbage
>>54187488
>>54187570
>>54187590
holy fucking shit
are you trolling?
adblock blockers != ad blockers
learn to read
>>54188589
>Adblocker blockers are not storing personal information so they are not illegal.
But they read information from your browsers that you haven't permitted them to read.
>European Union
>picture includes North Africa, Turkey and the rest of the middle east
KEKED
>>54188668
>United States of America
>picture includes Canada and Mexico XDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDD
>COUNTRY
>O
>U
>N
>T
>R
>Y
>XDDDD
KEKIMUS MAXIMUS AMIRITE?
>>54188668
The flag is a Vatican flag, and the Holy Roman Empire used to control all you see in the circle...
go figure.
They will just host their server outside of EU. Problem solved.
>>54188666
Doesn't matter if you gave them permission or not, they don't make use of any personally identifiable information to block you.
>>54188904
Having an adblocker is part of my online identity and therefore none of their business unless I approve. The same could be said about my display resolution or my operating system.
>>54188904
Read the fucking letter...
>[...] gaining of access to information already stored in the terminal equipment of a [user] is allowed on condition that the [user] concerned has given his or her consent
>>54185139
>without explicit consent
last time I checked, I had to download adblock.
>>54186738
euroman.dk
jp.dk
>>54188188
Journalism and advertising are pretty much inseparable these days. The content they provide is just bait for clicks or ads. It's a perversion of freedom of speech. They wouldn't write about stuff that wouldn't generate traffic, so good luck writing about real issues that nobody wants to read about.
>>54185139
>without explicit consent:
"this sites use cookies [ok] [tell me more]" is not asking for consent though
>>54189035
If that was the case a site could just ask the consent to look if the user us using an adblocker. If the user refuses, he gets blocked, if the user concedes and there is adblocker detected there he gets blocked.
>>54186724
So if i come to your house, aim a gun at your head and tell you that your new law is to paint all your walls right, you gonna argue about it?
>>54188904
Except it 100% does.
[x] version of [ublock/adblock/etc] on [browser]
That's enough to narrow my identity down enough to be illegal based on EU law.
>>54189136
>"this sites use cookies [ok] [tell me more]" is not asking for consent though
Consent is implied if you keep browsing.
>>54185233
Forbes?
>>54189152
Then that's exactly what they should do.
Now any website fucking retarded enough to block adblockers has a page everybody has to manually click through in order to access their website, ensuring nobody WITHOUT an adblocker could be bothered either, letting the auto-video ad playing pieces of malware spreading greedy jew cunts lose all their business and go under, as they deserve.
>>54189101
>euroman.dk
Nothing, just like on Bild
I can only remain distrustful to what's going on: The EU government is NEVER on the side of its inhabitants.
Thus you can safely consider adblockers harmful for our future.
>>54189212
>Thus you can safely consider adblockers harmful for our future.
Learn to fucking read. It says ADBLOCK BLOCKERS, not ADBLOCKERS.
>>54189170
not really, consent would be granted if it was worded similar to "are you ok with this website storing cookies in your computer? [yes] [no - then gtfo because if you browse it they'll be stored because we need them to]"
>>54189210
Because you're blocking adblock blockers. Not all of them do though.
>>54187714
>>54189210
Are you using AAK?
>>54189236
So i guess where you live you need to press a button on those signs that say 'by entering premises you agree we can search your shit' every time you walk in the store, huh?
>>54189246
Yes, also an EU list
>>54187514
They want to or have already outlawed abortions. I don't know how preventing kids growing up with/ being born out of stupid parents (probably a single mother with a two digit iq) is a bad thing. You should actively promote abortion in bad neighborhoods and slavic countries in general.
>>54189251
Those are legislated so i do not have to press anything and if the premises and i still have to grant permission to be searched unless they have a warrant signed by a judge or if the cops arrest me (conditions apply on the last one)
>mfw if Britcucks vote to leave the EU they will get fucked in the ass by ISP's, will stop having unlocked smartphones and they will just get cucked by big corporations like the rest of the anglosphere is
>>54189251
That is exactly how the EU cookie law works though.
Implicit consent isn't enough.
Sites HAVE to put up a huge banner nagging you to click it to give away all your rights to privacy.
And this is worse than letting sites collect your data without consent.
Because now you have no legal right to complain: you agreed to their terms so they can buttfuck you all they like.
>adblock blockers are illegal in the EU
>That's good to hear, but what about adblock blocker blocker blockers?
>>54190395
Once you have given your consent you can still withdraw it by deleting the cookies on your device
Blocking ads are illegal!
Is it illegal for me to cover my vision when walking down the street to cover ads?
All it is doing is covering the ads locally on my computer.
>>54190232
as well as being cucked by having our human rights bill (that we signed into law in the EU) weakened, worker's rights weakened, abolishment of the minimum wage, etc
I'm sure the rate of zero hour contracts will skyrocket as soon as any remaining manufacturing jumps ship due to not being able to get good trade deals and the economy switches to a full service one, an issue that is already plaguing employed people in the UK as it is
>>54191416
It's impressive how half of the people in the thread can't even read a title and understand it
>>54187752
>What value do these nanny state regulations add?
protection for the end user from websites using scripts to gather location about your machine or browser that isn't expressly provided by your browser
it has nothing to do with making the blocking of ads illegal but everything to do with preventing the javascript that runs on your machine which does, among other things, track you, detect your extensions, detect whether the ad has displayed, etc
>>54188188
>If these things start being behind a paywall, society is in deep problems and journalism will only be for the rich.
some major news sites (i.e., the uk's guardian) already have pay walled articles and view caps for non-subscribed users, they didn't need help from the eu to implement it
>>54188431
>Requiring JavaScript is perfectly legal.
>As is using client side JavaScript to check if your ads are loading.
re-read the letters
"in the light if the above, article 5(3) would also apply to the storage by websites of scripts in users' terminal equipment to detect if the users have installed or are using ad blockers."
i.e., they can't access that permission without express permission
i.e., no site currently doing this does so legally
>>54188589
OP does not talk about {adblockers} being illegal, they're talking about {detection if a user is using an adblocker} being illegal
I know it's phrased in a stupid way that's easy to misread but come on, put some effort into your reading
>>54189060
>last time I checked, I had to download adblock.
re-read op's post again
>>54189152
that's the end goal, websites not reading information on a user's installed addons among other things without express permission
>>54191559
I mean, OP's post is phrased pretty badly but it's no excuse now is it
>Hi loyal consumer.
>We noticed that our advertisements are not properly shown to you on your browser. This issue can be caused by a variety of things, such as an illegal adblocker. We don't want you to suffer from a broken and downgraded experience from browsing our website. Instead, we'll redirect you here until the issue is resolved.
>Thank you for your understanding and kindness.
>>54187562
Those aren't good things fascist
>>54191898
Get a load of this cuck
>>54187707
>EU cuck
>saying others are ruled by Sharia
How ironic
>>54190232
>mfw Britain leaves right before the EU signs up to TTIP and are the only ones not cucked by it as a result
>>54191893
>can't read the fucking op
>>54185164
Get raped and kill yourself, you retarded fucking faggot sack of shit with down syndrome.
