Substitute Alexander Hanff for privacy advocates, he’s the one pushing this, this is just basically a re-submission of this: https://lemmy.world/post/7027225

The problem with his logic is that even if those scripts fall within Article 5.3 of the ePrivacy Directive, there are exceptions provided under that very same law that apply to them. There’s a bunch of directives that provide examples, but none is a clear-cut example of what is being debated.

There’s also Patrick Breyer, but his claims overextend themselves because Google already provides a way to opt-out of the “surveillance advertising and tracking” he claims exists, which if it does without the ability to opt-out, would already be sue-able.

Calling ad detection “deploying spyware to our devices”, which is what Hanff is going for, well, does their ad detection aim to gather information about a person or organization and send it to another entity in a way that harms the user by violating their privacy, endangering their device’s security, or other means?

It seems to hinge on how much detecting adblocking would be considered gathering private data versus how it would be considered certifying a lawful business transaction whereby you have agreed to watch ads that people paid for to levy the cost of the service itself.