Not really changing the copyrighted work if the injects are outside (i.e. top, side, bottom) of the page itself. Looking at the above screen caps, it doesn't seem that the pages themselves have changing, only relocated on the users' screens.
2007-Dec-11 9:28 am: ·
DotMac4 Shill H8r Premium join:2007-10-26 Huntington Beach, CA
Re: Give them an inch, they take a mile.
They changed they appearance of a copyrighted work. If I take newpapers off the stand and put ad stickers in the margins I'm changing the page.
There aren't separate HTML pages. There is one HTML page that the browser loads and that's the one the ISP took upon itself to modify.
I don't allow a website to simply loaded ads in my browser because the site is free. There are annoying things that go on and it is up to me to decide if I am willing to sit through those ads or not.
I allow Google and Yahoo text ads. These are generally found on sites that I use the free services from like Gmail. I have even clicked the ads and bought some things.
Graphical or flash ads are a big no-no in my book and I block them. I use Ad-Block Plus and No Script to do it. These ads annoy the hell out of me, consume computer resources and have the ability to be malicious. If any website business model relies solely on ad sales then perhaps the owner should rethink their business plan.
Most people, by far, do not block ads. Most people, by far click those ads or Google and Doubleclick and all of the ad companies wouldn't be in business. Me? I'm not having it.
And I agree. ISP's should not be allowed to do this. It is interference with inter-state communications. Your phone company can't insert a random ad in the middle of a phone call for the same exact reason. That should be a violation of Federal law in the US of A.
2007-Dec-11 9:35 am: ·
nklb Premium join:2000-11-17 Ann Arbor, MI kudos:2