Hall of Shame of low-quality adblockers

And also it appears that the edit button on this forum seems to have some kind of time limit for how many days/weeks it’ll show up under a comment. Which is a very bad thing in threads like these.

Or it could be related to how I had to log out and in again a few days ago. It’s difficult to tell for sure from my perspective.

Try this:

```text

and all highlight “lang syntax” format gone.

That went pretty well, actually. :+1:

@ameshkov I truly applaud your work on exposing fake-AdBlock and uBlocker to the public, but I distinctly recall there was also an earlier lead that I’ve had surprisingly much problems proving after okiehsch from uBO doubted me on it, so I’m hoping you could help me look into it:

I firmly believe that AdBlock, Inc. (and not the actual GetAdblock team) were the guys who registered the uBlock trademark in Europe (https://euipo.europa.eu/eSearch/#details/trademarks/017822487), especially with https://adguard.com/en/blog/fake-ad-blockers-part-2.html establishing in the introduction that AdBlock, Inc. are/were indeed from Germany.

But since fake-AdBlock does not seem to have a website anymore nor any Wayback Machine archivings, I’m left stumped in trying to look up again my distinct memories that fake-AdBlock and uBlock.org had very similar GUIs, as well as any other things that could’ve connected those two extensions and sites.

Actually, @okiehsch is right, and the uBlock trademark belongs to the non-fake AdBlock.

The companies mentioned on the fake blockers pages do not exist in reality, it’s just Google does not verify developer accounts so you can write whatever you want there.

2 Likes