this post was submitted on 15 Jan 2025
362 points (97.9% liked)

Technology

60526 readers
6456 users here now

This is a most excellent place for technology news and articles.


Our Rules


  1. Follow the lemmy.world rules.
  2. Only tech related content.
  3. Be excellent to each another!
  4. Mod approved content bots can post up to 10 articles per day.
  5. Threads asking for personal tech support may be deleted.
  6. Politics threads may be removed.
  7. No memes allowed as posts, OK to post as comments.
  8. Only approved bots from the list below, to ask if your bot can be added please contact us.
  9. Check for duplicates before posting, duplicates may be removed

Approved Bots


founded 2 years ago
MODERATORS
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[–] thesmokingman@programming.dev 21 points 3 days ago (19 children)

I am genuinely concerned about this because Legal Eagle’s suit is directly tied to manipulating URLs and cookies. The suit, even with its focus on last click attribution, doesn’t make an incredibly specific argument. If Legal Eagle wins, this sets a very dangerous precedent for ad blockers being illegal because ad blockers directly manipulate cookies and URLs. I haven’t read the Gamer’s Nexus one yet.

Please note that I’m not trying to defend Honey at all. They’re actively misleading folks.

[–] kopasz7@sh.itjust.works 21 points 3 days ago (1 children)

But adblockers don't enable unlawful enrichment. Or do they?

[–] fmstrat@lemmy.nowsci.com 4 points 2 days ago* (last edited 2 days ago)

Only paid ones. Theoretically could impact Brave, for instance.

load more comments (17 replies)