The Debate Surrounding the Contentious Nature of Ad Blockers - The Debate Surrounding Ad Blockers' Use and Impact
Ad Blockers and Copyright Law: A Legal Gray Area in the EU
The legal status of ad blockers like Adblock Plus under European Union (EU) copyright law remains uncertain, following a recent ruling by Germany's Federal Court of Justice (BGH).
In a landmark decision, the BGH sent back a case involving the software Adblock Plus, developed by the Cologne-based company Eyeo, for retrial at a lower court level. The court highlighted that altering website display in a browser could potentially infringe copyright protection of computer programs under certain conditions.
Previously, lower courts, such as the Hamburg Regional Courts, had ruled that ad blockers did not infringe copyright. However, the BGH found these judgments to be insufficiently substantiated, emphasising that aspects like the DOM node tree and CSS structures generated by the browser could be considered protected expression under copyright law.
This ruling opens the possibility that blocking ads may infringe copyright under certain circumstances. The European Court of Justice (ECJ) has not issued a direct ruling on this specific copyright issue for ad blockers.
The Case and Its Implications
The case before the BGH centres around Adblock Plus, a software that blocks ads on websites. Springer, a German publishing company, has launched a legal challenge against the ad blocker, arguing that it alters the programming codes of websites and directly intervenes in the constitutionally protected offer of media companies.
Eyeo, the company behind Adblock Plus, interprets the ECJ ruling as making it clear that the alteration of a computer program's functionalities by the user does not constitute a copyright infringement. The company believes no single company should have the right to prohibit users from setting their own browser settings or forcing downloads of content or tracking.
The Stakeholders
Springer argues that digital advertising revenues and digital subscriptions are crucial for the future profitability of independent journalism, and ad blockers systematically try to prevent this. In contrast, Eyeo's CEO Frank Einecke views this case as not about Axel Springer versus his company or a dispute between a publisher and ad filter provider, but about users' fundamental rights to use the internet freely and view it without barriers.
The Future
The BGH must take the ECJ's interpretation into account in the current case. As of now, the legal status of ad blockers under EU copyright law remains unsettled at the EU level. The BGH's ruling sets an important precedent within EU law contexts, and no new decisions by the ECJ specifically addressing ad blockers and copyright were found in the search results.
[1] Source: Bundesgerichtshof (BGH), Germany's Federal Court of Justice
- The uncertainty surrounding the legality of ad blockers like Adblock Plus under EU copyright law could potentially expand to include vocational training websites, as the Germany's Federal Court of Justice (BGH) ruling highlighted that altering website display in a browser could infringe copyright protection of computer programs.
- In the ongoing debate over ad blockers and copyright law, technology advancements in vocational training programs could face similar legal challenges, as website display alterations in browser settings could potentially infringe on copyright protection of computer programs.
