Analysis Of The Competition Lawresponsbility Of AD-block Software

This article starts with the video website's business model,analyzes the nature of the pre-film advertising,and concludes that pre-film advertising is not a malicious advertisement,but in practice it is generally considered to be part of the video website service,or a consideration that must be paid for enjoying the free service.First of all,the adblocking behavior does not cause specific damage to the video website;secondly,adblocking software safeguards the interests of consumers.If it is considered that the advertisement is part of the service,the consumer has the option to skip the advertisement.If it is considered to be the price paid for enjoying the free service,then the behavior of the video website that aggravates the consumer's responsibility makes the clause invalid based on the format contract between the parties.Therefore,consumers do not have the obligation to watch advertisements.thirdly the adblocking technology is in line with the principle of technology neutrality,the adblocking software provider is not malicious in providing software,and the software setting is not targeted at a specific object,also there is no inducement.At the end,the article analyzes the existing advertising model,YouTube,and AdBlock's white list,and concludes that it is not suitable for domestic.And put forward suggestions on the problem of advertising shielding: The Internet Society should regulate the nature of pre-film advertisements.For advertisements as part of the service,the court should take into account consumers' reasonable tolerance obligations when making judgments;for advertisement is the price of payment,the user agreement should be established between the website and consumers on the basis of fairness and fairness.