Is it fair to use ad blocking software?

As advertising without your consent is unfair (e.g. in public spaces, which is actually what I call "forced advertising"), I would say that ad-blocking is not only fair: it is justice.

It's as fair as doing zapping on the TV when the ads are displayed :)

I believe it should be fair. It obvious companies and all can't grow without ads, but there's a lot of harmful ads out there on the internet. I'm the kind of person who doesn't like taking risks, and if it's possible I'll avoid all of them. I myself try to avoid ads as much as I can, as many of them are weird, repetitive, and most of the time try to harm me or my system. Ads should go through some "check" before they get approved and can go through, that way, if there were no harmful ads; there wouldn't be a problem.

The internet is not a commercial platform. It was created as a free communication network that was designed to work after a nuclear war. If companies decide to generate profits from advertisements they have to face the legal methods of blocking those commercial uses of the net. The solution are creative ideas for advertising that gather interest among the internet users.

Sometimes, yes. When a site already has lots of income from other sources, or when ads are too many, or have links to suspicious websites, sure. However, if they're a site's only method of income, maybe not.

It's very fair. I'm f**king tired of trying to view something and all I get is an a**load of pretentious bloatware on my screen for something that doesn't matter. It is also statistically proven on average that humans spend under 3 years of their life total viewing ads not by their own choice.

Adblock relieves the constant stream of advertising getting us straight into what we desire. Some ads aren't all bad and some of them are just there to make you aware. But commercial ads just want you to buy their product.

Ad or no ad, I just don't buy the stuff they sell. So it has no point to commercial me and I use adblock to don't annoy me and spare me extra time. The producers should be happy we make up our own ways to not see commercials who don't buy :).

This is acceptable because ads can be inappropriate or block a vital part of your screen. The companies and the websites still get money, because just the client-side html for the space of the ad is deleted.

By and large, yes.

No one signs an agreement to go to a webpage and be marketed to. We didn't agree to it with television either. Ad-blocking is identical to changing the channel during TV. Advertisers have no right to expect that we are looking at their advertisement for any reason.

However, if there were some specific situation where a person agreed to watch an ad to see content, then I might think that would be an unfair breach of contract. Still, most contracts these days are not negotiated in good faith.

It should be fair in some cases. Some ads have 18+ content, and sometimes they can't be skipped. YouTube is for 13+, so my opinion is that you can use AdBlock on YouTube and some websites like that, but on the websites you know there are no content that may be damaging, then you should turn it off. Because the websites you use every day needs money for what they are doing. Thanks!

To all the people writing that they pay for their internet acces, therfore they have a right to block ads: a site owner pays for the server and and has the right to block You from viewing the site if he detects an ad-blocking software. It's a double edged sword.

The problem is that so many ads are really obnoxious. When that is true, I think it is reasonable to block ads.

When they are just "regular" ads, I think don't think they should be blocked, because that is what supports the site. While some people think the web would be better if all sites are produced by those who volunteer their time and have no motive of making money, I don't agree.

I feel in most cases it is. I personally turn it off on YouTube in order to support my favorite creators, but I keep it on on other sites.

Is it sounds good to waste ur own life for watching ad? if u really wanna support smb, just make donation, easy ;)

If ads are not interesting for me, it's fair. But if there is an exertion there, I close adblock to support the owner.

Publicity can be good to support small creators making interesting content. But the ads are mainly used to make money (and annoying, and washing our brains...). It's a good solution for the ad blocking softwares if you can choose the sites on which you want to display ads. The best thing would be if we do not need money, so ads could be blocked definitively, but it's not for now...

I say it is when it isn't fair use. When it is (fair use), I don't like it because (usually) it is free, and watching or seeing an advert is just giving back to the creator for free. It takes about 5 seconds to watch an advert; it takes work to pay towards a person.