blog.mozilla.org
Is Germany on the Brink of Banning Ad Blockers? User Freedom, Privacy, and Security Is At Risk.
Across the internet, users rely on browsers and extensions to shape how they experience the web: to protect their privacy, improve accessibility, block harmful or intrusive content, and take control over what they see. But a recent ruling from Germany’s Federal Supreme Court risks turning one of these essential tools, the ad blocker, into a copyright liability — and in doing so, threatens the broader principle of user choice online.
Imagine you are watching television and you go to the kitchen for a snack during an ad break. Or you press the fast-forward button to skip some ads while listening to a podcast. Or perhaps you get a newspaper delivered to your house, and you see that it includes a special section made up of hallucinated AI content, so you drop the inset into the trash before taking the rest of the paper inside. Were these acts of copyright infringement? Of course not. But if you do something like this with a browser extension, a recent decision from the German Federal Supreme Court suggests that maybe you did infringe copyright. This misguided logic risks user freedom, privacy, and security.
There are many reasons, in addition to ad blocking, that users might want their browser or a browser extension to alter a webpage. These include changes to improve accessibility, to evaluate accessibility, or to protect privacy. Indeed, the risks of browsing range from phishing, to malicious code execution, to invasive tracking, to fingerprinting, to more mundane harms like inefficient website elements that waste processing resources. Users should be equipped with browsers and browser extensions that give them both protection and choice in the face of these risks. **A browser that inflexibly ran any code served to the user would be an extraordinarily dangerous piece of software.** Ad blockers are just one piece of this puzzle, but they are an important way that users can customize their experience and lower risks to their security and privacy.
The recent court ruling is the latest development in a legal battle between publisher Axel Springer and Eyeo (the maker of Adblock Plus) that has been winding its way around the German legal system for more than a decade. The litigation has included both competition and copyright claims. Until now Eyeo has largely prevailed and the legality of ad blockers has been upheld. Most significantly, in 2022, the Hamburg appeal court ruled that Adblock Plus did not infringe the copyright of websites but rather was merely facilitating a choice by users about _how_ they wished their browser to render the page.
Unfortunately, on July 31, the German Federal Supreme Court partially overturned the decision of the Hamburg court and remanded the case for further proceedings. The BGH (as the Federal Supreme Court is known) called for a new hearing so that the Hamburg court can provide more detail regarding which part of the website (such as bytecode or object code) is altered by ad blockers, whether this code is protected by copyright, and under what conditions the interference might be justified.
The full impact of this latest development is still unclear. The BGH will issue a more detailed written ruling explaining its decision. Meanwhile, the case has now returned to the lower court for additional fact-finding. It could be a couple more years until we have a clear answer. We hope that the courts ultimately reach the same sensible conclusion and allow users to install ad blockers.
We sincerely hope that Germany does not become the second jurisdiction (after China) to ban ad blockers. This will significantly limit users’ ability to control their online environment and potentially open the door to similar restrictions elsewhere. Such a precedent could embolden legal challenges against other extensions that protect privacy, enhance accessibility, or improve security. Over time, this could deter innovation in these areas, pressure browser vendors to limit extension functionality, and shift the internet away from its open, user-driven nature toward one with reduced flexibility, innovation, and control for users.
