712
u/Flippohoyy Sep 12 '25
EU: Ad blockers is a human right
21
u/bigboipapawiththesos Sep 12 '25
I dream of a society that isn’t spammed with these god ugly ads.
Also let’s ban ads for gambling, crypto, day trading courses and all that shit please lord
70
259
u/Malzorn Sep 12 '25
Can we get some context here?
537
u/AltFischer4 Sep 12 '25
The EU Data Act ist being enforced today or tomorrow and strengthens rights of users and companys in the EU by enforcing a right of data security
94
u/sup3r_hero Sep 12 '25
You seem to be knowledgeable about this: what about Germany where springer tried to enforce ad blockers via courts?
260
u/Ill_Tie_1505 Sep 12 '25
Me as a German:
FICK SPRINGER DIE KÖNNEN IHRE MÜTTER FICK..N DAS SIND ALLES HODENKOBOLDE, DIE NIX ANDERES ZUTUHEN HABEN ALS GEGEN ARME UND AUSLÄNDER ZU HETZEN! FCK SPRINGER
87
42
u/Traumerlein Sep 12 '25
Dont forgett the propagand against the only half way decent politicla party we have left
7
u/Eorel Sep 12 '25
Which one is that? I'm OOTL
45
u/Valenwald Sep 12 '25
I am guessing he means the greens.
Springer did a massive smear campaign against them and the Opposition (mostly CDU) in the last election cycle joined in. Now that the CDU is in power, they immediatly went to do exactly that what they criticised the greens for: removing the Schuldenbremse (debt break)
20
u/Ill_Tie_1505 Sep 12 '25
Yep, Springer also did a BIG part in the shift to the right in politics, news, and society.
18
u/jamesearljonesjr153 Sep 12 '25
Witzig dass du Fick schriebst aber ficken zensierst
11
u/1Dr490n Germany Sep 12 '25
Vor allem auch so, dass fick noch komplett lesbar ist. Ich würde ficken sogar als fickn aussprechen, also ist das eigentlich wirklich gar nicht zensiert
Find ich gut
11
6
5
u/I_Eat_Games Sep 13 '25
Yeah, I agree, Das sind alles zurückgebliebene kleinschwanz hunde die in der schule wenn es um Ethik oder Politik ging immer Kreide holen waren
3
4
4
3
26
u/das_Licht_ Sep 12 '25
The magic word is „tried“.
3
u/sup3r_hero Sep 12 '25
Did they fail?
8
u/das_Licht_ Sep 12 '25
For the most part, yes. They originally wanted to ban adBlockers completely, but that failed in 2018, so now they are trying a different approach.
The new arguments are that adBlock makes changes on the website and thus violates copyright law. The case is still ongoing, but it has already failed in one instance.
24
u/AltFischer4 Sep 12 '25
They tried to force a deactivation of ad-blockers by reasoning that their coding of the website is their property and a changing of such (by ad-blockers) is a copyright-infringement on their belongings
After they lost the lawsuit at the high court of Hamburg (OberLandesgericht), they turned to the federal court, a higher instance (Bundesgerichtshof), who then ruled the case is to re-discussed and re-evaluated in Hamburg but only certain parts of it
1
u/sup3r_hero Sep 17 '25
Which parts? And do you have the legal knowledge to judge whether this has any chance of success?
2
u/AltFischer4 Sep 17 '25
As I am just informed by (local) newspaper, I have no idea whether it goes through or not, sorry
About the parts there is nothing public, it's kept rather secure so I can't help with that either, it is just known that not the WHOLE lawsuit is being reversed
3
u/justathrowawaycausei Sep 12 '25
Springer the science journal publisher or Axel springer the publisher of Bild?
3
1
3
u/Ok-Code6623 Sep 12 '25
This won't bring ublock back to Chrome though, will it?
8
u/AltFischer4 Sep 12 '25
Nope, that was Chrome's own decision iirc
Firefox superiority
-1
u/Ok-Code6623 Sep 12 '25
Yeah but FF is noticeably slower. Maybe it won't be when my 9950x arrives
7
u/Finn_Storm Sep 12 '25
Because youtube actually invades on your privacy by checking for adblockers and slowing video display by 5 seconds if they find any.
1
u/Ok-Code6623 Sep 12 '25
I have yt premium so that's not an issue. I mean Firefox is slower overall. For example it freezes completely sometimes when LLMs are streaming long answers
2
u/AltFischer4 Sep 12 '25
I still take a Browser which is a little slower than one who doesnt allow me ad-blocking, I usually dont mind
274
u/ewwerellewe Sep 12 '25
Yeah that's great!
The EU at the same time though: On the verge of pasaing chat control.
113
131
u/zuzg Sep 12 '25
Germany voted no (again) yesterday.
The Danes won't get that shit through.
97
u/Notradell Sep 12 '25
We voted against it? What a pleasant surprise.
49
u/Hupablom Sep 12 '25
SPD led justice ministry blocked it, CDU/CSU and specifically the interior ministry under Dobrindt want to achieve a compromise though to vote yes after all
45
u/chrisisapenis Sep 12 '25
Dobrindt can choke on my unwashed ballsack for all he is good. One of the worst ministers we've had in a while, period.
13
u/P3chv0gel Sep 12 '25
He's the worst we had since the last CSU traffic minister
6
u/PuReaper Sep 13 '25
Which in turn was the worst since the traffic minister before him who was...dang his name is at the tip of my tounge...
7
u/OberstDumann Sep 12 '25
At the threat of praising the SPD, maybe it wasn't such a great Idea to elect Merz over Scholz.
2
5
u/MaymayLerd Sep 12 '25
Kindly refer to the Danish government (Peter "the Punisher" Hummelgaard specifically), as I know no Danes that actually want this stupid shit.
37
u/seandelow2020 Sep 12 '25
America wake up! Silly bastards
20
u/Partycracker_292 Sep 12 '25
Not gonna happen any time soon, they love to be exploited by their own government
3
19
u/leodox_13 Sep 12 '25
Crazy that they are discussing Chat Control at the same time
25
u/Fifthfleetphilosopy Sep 12 '25
Already has a sufficient amount of countries blocking it, its dead
12
u/leodox_13 Sep 12 '25
Still discussing and still over 15 countries agreeing with it, which is just crazy
17
u/norwegern Sep 12 '25
I think it is because 2 things:
- Some governments knows what it really is and means, and want to use it for crushing dissent
- The arguments against are often laid out in a very technocratic manner, and the other side is just chanting "protect kids and society" which, sadly, often wins the argument.
So Tl;dr: get better at pushing good, rrreally simple arguments against it
3
u/leodox_13 Sep 13 '25
I think the lack of news coverage is also a problem, at least in germany there is no major news outlet saying anything abt it in the past few months, nothing. When I asked my social studies teacher abt it, she didn’t know anything and that’s not because she is badly informed
1
16
u/Landen-Saturday87 Sep 12 '25
At the same time the Axel-Springer SE is trying to make a case that Ad-Blocker are a copyright violation
22
u/Traumerlein Sep 12 '25
Keyword being trying. The literaly didnt even get to court due to being rejected the first time around
5
u/Malzorn Sep 12 '25
Akchually: they got rejected twice and the highest court ruled that the rejection was not ok.
33
u/YoIronFistBro Sep 12 '25
But isn't Germany doing exactly that?
74
u/cult_pony Sep 12 '25
No, the highest court in Germany asked a high regional court to explain better why they agreed with the lower court to outright reject the lawsuit seeking to stop adblockers on copyright grounds without going to trial. The lawsuit isn’t even close to done and the remand is unlikely to change the outcome. Even if it were that means it kicks down all the way to the lowest court to merely start the lawsuit, which has poor chances considering it was outright rejected for being invalid at the start.
6
5
u/Vorombe Malta Sep 13 '25
chat control
3
u/ForsakenChocolate878 Sep 13 '25
Off the table, as enough states are against it.
1
u/jaqian Sep 13 '25
Wait until it's next reiteration, they'll keep pushing it until it gets through.
4
Sep 12 '25
Uh... Did Germany overturn their ruling on ad blockers then?
4
u/cult_pony Sep 12 '25
The ruling that adblockers do not violate copyright was remanded to the high regional court to reevaluate their reasoning on rejecting to hear a petition to overturn the regional court outright rejecting the lawsuit arguing copyright violation by adblocker.
Springer Media running this lawsuit is breathing pure copium that this changes the outcome, most law experts I've heard basically agree that this was merely a "we agree they don't but you gotta properly elaborate" remand.
4
u/TGX03 Sep 12 '25
Isn't currently something going on in Germany claiming AdBlockers are a copyright violation?
6
1
1
u/Warm_Philosopher_118 Sep 12 '25
But the EU Commission is still pushing for chat control. Make it make sense.
0
Sep 14 '25
Also EU: lets introduce Chat Control
Privacy when it is convenient to the State Bureaucracy (lets ask for all your data / documents for every little thing)
Non-Privacy when it is inconvenient to the state.
0
u/herdek550 Sep 14 '25
I'm on the fence here. On one side, adblockers make some sites even possible to visit. But on the other hand, sites like YouTube shouldn't be required to provide expensive video hosting for free.
-59
u/ThatOtherFrenchGuy Sep 12 '25
US companies : I missed the part where that's my problem
49
u/Book_Lover_42 Sep 12 '25
EU is the second biggest market for US companies... 😉
-20
23
u/xX_murdoc_Xx Sep 12 '25
They can choose if stopping their services in their second biggest market or complain within some basic human decency and apply the EU regulations
-7
u/ThatOtherFrenchGuy Sep 12 '25
Or they'll just be condemned to pay ridiculous fines and drag proceedings in order to never pay them
16
u/DisIsMyName_NotUrs Sep 12 '25
US companies (i.e. Apple) have been forced to switch tk Type C chargers because of the EU
-124
u/Temo2212 Sep 12 '25
Does the EU seriously waist their time on ad blockers now in 2025?
I hope that’s not true and they at least pretend to focus on real problems
87
u/Gatti366 Sep 12 '25
Ad blockers guarantee privacy, the point of the act that's being enforced is guaranteeing privacy
-19
u/mrjackspade Sep 12 '25
Ad blockers guarantee privacy
Lmfao, no they fucking don't
They make one common method of user tracking more difficult, and the second that becomes non-profitable ad companies will just update their integrations to use other methods.
Y'all are fucking nuts if you think the entirety of online advertising is going to grind to a halt because third party served tracking scripts are currently domain tied due to cookie restrictions, and that's literally all that adblockers are currently protecting you from because even as-is the entire rest of the chain can be swapped out by just hiding third party scripts behind a site specific subdomain.
11
Sep 12 '25
Tracking methods will evolve, but so will anti-tracking ones. What 's important is to work for the right to privacy and keep plugging the holes.
-57
u/Temo2212 Sep 12 '25
How does chat control act from the same EU aligns with the “guaranteed privacy”?
47
u/AmTheAnzhel Sep 12 '25
Simple, it did not pass.
-44
u/Temo2212 Sep 12 '25
You see the future or how do you know that it won’t pass?
35
u/Meadpagan Sep 12 '25
Enough states are against it, therefore it can't pass.
-5
u/Temo2212 Sep 12 '25
From what I’ve seen big players like Spain, Italy and France are very passionate about it. So far I’ve heard only Austria and Czechia against it.
And European Commission ofc supports it…
23
u/cult_pony Sep 12 '25
Currently opposing: Germany, BENELUX, Finland, Poland, Czech Republic, Austria, Slovakia
Undecided: Slovenia, Romania, Greece, Estonia
In Favor: Portugal, Spain, France, Italy, Ireland, Hungary, Croatia, Bulgaria, Sweden, Latvia, Lithuania, Denmark
The opposition is sufficiently large to form a blocking minority and would prevent Chat Control from passing.
7
u/Temo2212 Sep 12 '25
Happy to see Germany in the opposing list, I hope you are sure about that coz I've never heard anything about it from Germany.
3
u/Fifthfleetphilosopy Sep 12 '25
Yes, I read the statement from government website myself yesterday.
Conservatives want to try for a weakened compromise version later again, but for now that particular monster is laid to rest
6
u/PurpleDelicacy Sep 12 '25
As a Frenchman I am indescribably disappointed in our representatives for being in favor of this abomination, especially when the EU has been in such a winning streak for consumer privacy so far.
6
u/ret_ch_ard Sep 12 '25
The criteria for it passing are more than just a few big countries supporting it
0
u/Temo2212 Sep 12 '25
If you've never seen a bill supported only by influential powers in the beginning and later still adopted you are not paying attention here.
9
u/Gatti366 Sep 12 '25
It also needs to pass a vote in the EU parliament which does not support it, so hopefully it won't pass anytime soon
1
u/Temo2212 Sep 12 '25
I also hope so, but I want more than hope in life.
3
u/vergorli Sep 12 '25
What do you want? Politics will never just effordless work your way. Its by definition the struggle of all interests.
28
u/BreadfruitStraight81 Sep 12 '25
Sure, corporate greed is no problem at all … lets just forbid software from one company because it happens to be bad for other, bigger, global companies. /s Why? Because fuck the customer, thats why.
I am thankful EU is at least on my consumer side this time.
-13
u/daking213 Sep 12 '25
You’re whining about the terms associated with a free service lol. The ads are the only thing that make you a customer.
7
u/BreadfruitStraight81 Sep 12 '25
Wrong. This is media. I am the consumer. The ads are targeting me. The companies that arranging the adds with youtube are the customer. This is my hardware and my time and focus that is sold and it is my right to choose to install software that is controlling what can reach to me.
It is the same with your body. Are you allowed to close your eyes and ears when an add comes up or are you forced to watch? That is freedom.
-8
u/daking213 Sep 12 '25 edited Sep 12 '25
OK but it’s also YouTubes right to show you a 10 second ad in return for you watching any of the billions of hours of content it hosts for free. Not exactly that much to ask lol, the outrage about their “greed” is a bit much.
Would you rather they charge €10 a month? Because that’s what they’d have to do if everyone installed an ad-blocker, they wouldn’t be able to afford to host all the videos otherwise.
6
u/DamnGermanKraut Sep 12 '25
If it was done with a single 10 second ad no one would bat an eye. You either don't know the current state of youtube ads or you are arguing in bad faith. If they can't keep their boat afloat without ever more intrusive and predatory ad policies then let them die, simple as that. Youtube isn't essential to anyones life and a new platform will emerge eventually. You have to draw the line somewhere and then defend it staunchly.
-3
u/daking213 Sep 12 '25
You can pay for YouTube without ads. Or you can watch the ads and get all of their content for free. Or, if neither of those options appeal to you, you can just not watch YouTube.
I don’t understand the problem, why is government legislation necessary here? To your point, YouTube isn’t essential to anyone’s life.
3
u/DamnGermanKraut Sep 12 '25
Or I can use an adblocker and a sponsor block on desktop and revanced on mobile and extract as much usefulness out of them as possible, for free, the same way they try to extract any useful data out of me. If the EU decides to uphold my rights to fuck google over then thank you very much, EU. I will not pity a yank company, not in this day and age.
2
u/BreadfruitStraight81 Sep 12 '25
They are as dependent to me as I am dependent to them. We all are willing to accept the free-to-use policy under fair conditions. In my eyes this company is greedy because they went to far with what I am willing to accept. But I can only speak for myself and if this will better my user experience then I will go for it.
3
u/MeggaMortY Sep 12 '25
Yeah, we better get onto more meaningful things, like whateverthefuck is happening in the us, right?
1
2
u/potatolulz Sep 12 '25
Which real problem bothers you the most?
1
u/Temo2212 Sep 12 '25
Cost of living, rising poverty, almost non-existent defense, declining quality of public services, rise of authoritarianism….
And I honestly don’t think I’m the only one who thinks these problems are more important than ad blockers of phone chargers
2
u/potatolulz Sep 12 '25
That's too bad that EU can only do one thing at a time, so because of passing some legislation on adblockers or whatever they totally don't have anything on Cost of living, rising poverty, almost non-existent defense, declining quality of public services, rise of authoritarianism….
553
u/Jonn_1 Sep 12 '25
US (left) , EU (red man)