|Image Credits: Campaignlive.co.uk|
Ad blocking software was and is a response to relentlessly aggressive advertising.
Imagine sitting down at a table of friends to chat and one of them starts talking at you, over everyone else, and then climbs on the table and kneels right in front of you screaming and waving his arms so you can't reasonably interact with anyone else.
That's what certain web advertising is like. It's so aggressive it interferes with whatever you came to the website to do in the first place.
The neat thing about all of this is that Adblock offers its service to consumers for free, then makes companies pay in order to circumvent their service, but only after meeting strict criteria to prevent overbearing ad placement. Adblock then essentially becomes a privately owned regulating body, and if they should allow too many or the wrong ads through, they would just loose market share and thus money (ad revenue, ironically enough), which motivates them to continue keeping those restrictions in place.
The nice thing about technology is, it evolves faster than court cases like these. By the time adblock is drug through the court systems, win or lose there will be a billion alternatives to it, proving all the legal fees and years spent by these ad companies will effectively be a completely worthless effort. - Source
Post a Comment