Jump to content

Talk:Ghostery: Difference between revisions

Page contents not supported in other languages.
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Content deleted Content added
ClueBot III (talk | contribs)
m Archiving 1 discussion to Talk:Ghostery/Archives/2019. (BOT)
Line 5: Line 5:
{{oldafdfull| date = 10 June 2011 (UTC) | result = '''keep''' | page = Ghostery }}
{{oldafdfull| date = 10 June 2011 (UTC) | result = '''keep''' | page = Ghostery }}
{{User:ClueBot III/ArchiveThis|archiveprefix=Talk:Ghostery/Archives/|format=Y|age=26297|index=yes|archivebox=yes|box-advert=yes}}
{{User:ClueBot III/ArchiveThis|archiveprefix=Talk:Ghostery/Archives/|format=Y|age=26297|index=yes|archivebox=yes|box-advert=yes}}

== [[Free and open-source software]], [[Mozilla Public License]], and Ghostery's [[end-user license agreement]] ==

Currently, Ghostery is [https://github.com/ghostery/ghostery-extension/blob/master/LICENSE licensed] under the [[Mozilla Public License]] 2.0. Although their website hosts an [https://www.ghostery.com/about-ghostery/browser-extension-end-user-license-agreement/ end user license agreement], that page is not presented to users prior to installation, and users are not given an opportunity to read or accept it. Ghostery is also hosted in the extension directories of supported browsers (e.g. [https://addons.mozilla.org/en-US/firefox/addon/ghostery/ Firefox Add-ons], [https://chrome.google.com/webstore/detail/ghostery-%E2%80%93-privacy-ad-blo/mlomiejdfkolichcflejclcbmpeaniij Chrome Web Store], [https://www.microsoft.com/en-us/p/ghostery-privacy-ad-blocker/9nblggh52ngz Microsoft Store], [https://addons.opera.com/en/extensions/details/ghostery/ Opera add-ons]). Among these listings, the Firefox add-on explicitly states that Ghostery is licensed under the MPL 2.0 (with no mention of the EULA), and the other listings don't comment on licensing. Additionally, Ghostery offers direct downloads of their browser extensions through their [https://github.com/ghostery/ghostery-extension/releases GitHub releases page]. That page is linked to their repository, which mentions only the MPL 2.0 and not the EULA.

Altogether, since the EULA appears to be unused while the MPL 2.0 licensing is prominently displayed, both Ghostery's source code and binaries appear to be [[free and open-source software]] licensed under the MPL 2.0. —&nbsp;'''''[[User:Newslinger|<span style="color:#536267;">Newslinger</span>]]'''&nbsp;<small>[[User talk:Newslinger#top|<span style="color:#708090;">talk</span>]]</small>'' 07:35, 18 February 2019 (UTC)


== A Commons file used on this page has been nominated for deletion ==
== A Commons file used on this page has been nominated for deletion ==

Revision as of 17:15, 18 February 2022

A Commons file used on this page has been nominated for deletion

The following Wikimedia Commons file used on this page has been nominated for deletion:

Participate in the deletion discussion at the nomination page. —Community Tech bot (talk) 01:50, 9 January 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Ghostery Lite

For the current version of Safari, they make available only Ghostery Lite. We should have an entry on this. On what is missing. It still claims to offer "comprehensive privacy protection". -IP — Preceding unsigned comment added by 2601:646:8381:99C0:8071:38EE:1DF5:DAFA (talk) 18:56, 15 January 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Unsubstantiated severe claim in criticism section since at least 2015

This was brought up already in https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Talk:Ghostery/Archives/2015#Criticism_Section and still applies.

In the Criticism section, one sentence reads: "GhostRank [...] sent that information back to advertisers so they could better formulate their ads to avoid being blocked.[20]" (Emphasis mine.)

The first part is as far as I know uncontested, the second has been contradicted by the makers many, many times, is not further qualified, explained or supported in any way in the referenced article and is basically unsubstantiated conjecture.

(I am not affiliated with the company or the extension and haven't used it in years because I don't need it and am uncomfortable with their affiliations, even if I personally don't think they're immoral.)

--2003:C9:4711:4B00:A0D9:D261:9830:FF1B (talk) 12:19, 9 February 2022 (UTC)[reply]