Pop-up blocking = thievery?

I just came across this site, Anti-Leech. They offer some sort of a thing, apparently java script -based, that detects if the user is using an ad-blocker or a pop-up blocker. If yes, the page refuses to load at all and gives you this message instead:

Quote:

---

We have determined that you use ad blocking software. This site is provided for free and depend on an income from these ads. By blocking them, you make it impossible for us to continue keeping this website online for free. Therefore, you will not be able to access this website again until you uninstall or de-activate your ad blocking software.

---

So I thought I'd
1) ask your opinions on this
2) point the ones who might consider this as a good thing to the site
3) set this as a challenge for you: build a Proxomitron script that bypasses Anti-Leech. ;)

I personally didn't have too much time to investigate the script (it's New Year's Eve, after all) but I will do it some time next year.

Anti-Leech.com also seems to offer a download link protector, html-code protector, image protector and an e-mail link protector (against spam-bots).

Edit/Add: [glowpurple]Happy New Year![/glowpurple]

my opinion....

i think that any site using this script is gonna lose alot of visitors :)
why go through all the hassle of turning off your add blockers to view some site thats prolly filled with banners etc when u can prolly find a 100 sites like it elsewhere online without the s
script?

v_Ln

their free to do this and im free not to go there.

it a site is unfamiliar to me the only thing that gets loaded is html. if a message like that poped up for sure its not going to get loaded. im not loading what i dont know.

with the amount of surfers that let anything load im sure it dosn't matter to them.

Ok... what if you don't use the ad blocking software... but like some have already done...

edit your hosts file.

Tedob1 has a tutorial about it already. Would you be denied access still?

i couldn't image adding all those sites one by one. that's for the tut =P

Well, I can understand if a site is using pop ups to gain money and is having them blocked, then yes I could realize that in a way could be considered theivery. But, when we go to a site with a pop-up blocker, we're innocent in my opinion. Why? Because whether there is a pop-up or not, we won't know because we're using a pop-up blocker. And by the time we do know, its too late, right? That's just me though.


Regards,
Silentstalker

<sarcasm target="users of anti-leach">
Yeah sure, pop-up blocking is thievery...
And so is manually closing pop-up windows as soon as they appear without reading them!
</sarcasm>

I'm getting tired and pretty anoyed by companies that think they have the right to control everyone in order for them to make more profit... It's getting quite ridiculous, IMHO! And the worst thing is noone (read government(s), and no offense but especially the US gov.) is going to stop them; even worst, they help them (DMCA...)!

I mean, sure, publicity seems to be inevitable: it's been with TV for a long time (pretty much what pushed tv to the houses in the first place), but no one was ever forced to watch the ads or be denied viewing of the program...

And besides, companies don't even seem to care anymore about fair use...

Well, I'm done ranting... (felt good though!)


Ammo

I think businesses are walking a fine line when they start implementing measures such as this. Sure, the businesses do have the right restrict access to pop-up blockers, but customers also have the right to say "we're not gonna put up with this."

In my opinion, the businesses that have a problem with pop-up blockers need to take a serious look at their business plan. If a company is SO DEPENDANT on pop-up revenue to pay their bills, they are just asking for trouble. If a fast food restaurant said that "You have to read all the ads we painted on the windows before we'll let you see the menu", you'd laugh in their faces.

Legitimate businesses that have solid business plans do not have any problems with this. The people complaining are those "free sites" (informational, charitable, tutorial, etc.). Maybe it's the capitalist in me, maybe it's the Darwinist... but I say this is a prime example of "Survival of the Fittest". If the cause/knowledge that the free site is supporting/promoting can't solicit enough support from the viewers, the site goes away. If there is enough of a following to provide the support/resources needed to keep the site afloat, hooray!... the cause/site has proven to be worthy.

Bottom line is that I think these are just consumers standing up for their rights.