Stop YouTube ads once and for all

[recycle]

Call it whatever you want, but I have a really low opinion of criminals/thieves!

Criminal? Thieves?
It's not that easy. Adblocks themselves are not illegal, on the basis that you have the right to decide which content and scripts enter your system, this is a topic on which adblocker devs have won several court cases. If you want to delve deeper you can start here:

https://blockadblock.com/adblocking/adblockers-dont-break-the-law-except-when-they-do/

https://blockadblock.com/adblocking/addressing-adblocking-terms-use-agreement/

 

[DLS79]

Criminal? Thieves?

When you watch an ad on YT, (68% of the ad revenue goes to the creator of the video you where watching (assuming they meet the minimum requirements), and the rest goes to YT. When you block ads you're stealing money/income from the people who created the video you wanted to watch.

 

[Rednaxela]

Besides, I don't need any boner pills...

Huh? I never get those. Only ones for nylon stockings.

 

[recycle]

When you watch an ad on YT, (68% of the ad revenue goes to the creator of the video you where watching (assuming they meet the minimum requirements), and the rest goes to YT. When you block ads you're stealing money/income from the people who created the video you wanted to watch.

Whether blocking ads on YouTube is stealing or not is decided by a judge in court, if you carefully read the links I posted, it seems that this is not the case, on the basis that "you have the right to decide which content and scripts enter your system”. Obviously, you are free to think that the practice of adblocking is unethical: no one stops you from watching all the commercials you want

 

[DLS79]

Obviously, you are free to think that the practice of adblocking is unethical

That's putting it mildly.

 

[antcollinet]

That's putting it mildly.

It's no more unethical than me skipping ads (back in the day I used a PVR), walking out of the room when they are on, or simply diverting my attention elsewhere for the duration.

 

[Golf]

Bought a newspaper two or three years ago, only to cut out a certain article from page 3. The rest of it went into the waste paper bin, unread.

Man, I feel guilty to this very day

 

[DLS79]

It's no more unethical than me skipping ads (back in the day I used a PVR), walking out of the room when they are on, or simply diverting my attention elsewhere for the duration.

That's kind of an apples and oranges comparison.

For broadcast television the broadcaster gets paid based on ratings and excepted viewership. It doesn't matter if you record it, fall asleep, or are getting a snack, the broadcaster gets paid either way.

Blocking a YT ad is ensuring the add can't be "broadcast" to you, and thus the creator doesn't get paid.

 

[Rednaxela]

Gentlemen…

Please refrain from the ethical discussion of this guide on my post. If you wish to discuss the ethics of this, see the previous post.

 

[DLS79]

Bought a newspaper two or three years ago, only to cut out a certain article from page 3. The rest of it went into the waste paper bin, unread.

Man, I feel guilty to this very day

This is the most nonsensical analogy I've heard in a long long time. You paid for the Newspaper, thus they got what they wanted (money), and you got what you wanted a newspaper!

 

[DLS79]

Gentlemen…

Sorry, but sweet isn't a moderator. unless a moderator steps in and says we/I can't discuss that I'm going to continue to respond as i see fit!

 

[Rednaxela]

Well he asks us kindly and offers an alternative.

Edit, I take this back. The thread got closed.

 

[recycle]

Sorry, but sweet isn't a moderator. unless a moderator steps in and says we/I can't discuss that I'm going to continue to respond as i see fit!

Take off the mask: you're not discussing, you're trolling

 

[DLS79]

Well he asks us kindly and offers an alternative.

Even if we wanted to, we can't because that thread is locked.

 

[DLS79]

Take off the mask: you're not discussing, you're trolling

You can call it whatever you want, I'm responding to posts that I disagree with. It's no different to the huge number of users here who responded to golden ear ridiculousness.

 

[Golf]

You paid for the Newspaper

That is correct. But that price I had paid was a reduced one, thanks to the ads money that went into producing my newspaper copy and which was invested with the very strong and very noble hope that I would pay attention to the ads and buy some of the advertised goods or services.

Nothing of it happened. Because I am such a crook

 

[DLS79]

That is correct. But that price I had paid was a reduced one, thanks to the ads money that went into producing my newspaper copy and which was invested with the very strong and very noble hope that I would pay attention to the ads and buy some of the advertised goods or services.

I think you missed the point. As soon as you purchased the paper the advertiser & publisher financial interaction was complete.

It's no different for YT, if the add plays then YT and the content creator get paid. It doesn't matter if you are using the restroom or getting a snack, and thus didn't watched the add.

 

[recycle]

I think you missed the point. As soon as you purchased the paper the advertiser & publisher financial interaction was complete.

It's no different for YT, if the add plays then YT and the content creator get paid. It doesn't matter if you are using the restroom or getting a snack, and thus didn't watched the add.

Adblocks are perfectly legal, I have published the links with the court rulings, (if you had read them, the discussion would already be over). If adblocks were illegal they would be immediately banned from the Apple Store and Google Play. Furthermore, if there were any irregularities in those softwares, the devs would be responsible, certainly not the end user. Calling "criminal" a guy at home who doesn't want to watch the McBacon adv seems really too much to me.

I understand that you empathize with artists, but I'm already doing a lot by giving them my attention: I guess you know that for an artist, the real value of being on YouTube is the amount of views and subscribers, certainly not the spare change of the adv reward

 

[Golf]

As soon as you purchased the paper the advertiser & publisher financial interaction was complete.

Come on ... This is not about the advertiser & publisher financial interaction, as you are very well aware of. Instead, this is about what the advertising companies want us to do. They want us to pay attention to their ads and to buy their goods or services. And they are investing an amaaaaaaazing lot of money to reach that goal.

But I failed them, scoundrel that I am

 

[DLS79]

I understand that you empathize with artists, but I'm already doing a lot by giving them my attention: I guess you know that for an artist, the real value of being on YouTube is the amount of views and subscribers, certainly not the spare change of the adv reward

I personally don't use YT for music consumption. I'm talking about more than just artists, I'm talking about content creators as a whole.

for example here is a maching related creator that I follow. My 5 hear old loves to sit and watch this with me because he finds it fascinating.

https://www.youtube.com/@CuttingEdgeEngineering

Only he and YT know exactly how much he is making but I'm sure its a none trivial amount that supplements his main income nicely.

https://socialblade.com/youtube/c/cuttingedgeengineeringaustralia