Enlarge (credit: Schöning/ullstein bild via Getty Images)

The legal arguments made by Spiegel Online, outlined in an unofficial English-translated copy (PDF) of the judgment courtesy of Eyeo, argued they were making a “unified offer” to online consumers. Essentially, that offer is read the news content for free and view some ads. While Internet users have the freedom “not to access this unified offer,” neither they nor Adblock Plus have the right to “dismantle” it. Eyeo’s behavior thus amounted to unfair competition, and it could even wipe the offer out, Spiegel claimed.

“The Claimant [Spiegel] argues that the Defendant’s [Eyeo’s] business model endangers the Claimant’s existence,” reads the judgment. Because users aren’t willing to pay for editorial content on the Web, “it is not economically viable for the Claimant to switch to this business model.”