Doubtful.

If you intentionally loop-download large files or fake requests on websites that you don't like, in order to create big CDN charges for them, then what ?

Without reaching the threshold of Denial of Service, just sneakily growing it.

Nobody benefits, except for the weird idea of the pleasure of harming people, still illegal.

▲

infecto 13 hours ago | parent | next [-]

You are just wrong on many levels and keep repeating the same mistruths.

	▲	12 hours ago \| parent [-]
		[deleted]

▲

reaperducer 9 hours ago | parent | prev [-]

Doubtful

Not doubtful at all. He literally laid out the definition of click fraud for you.

As someone who ran ads on web sites as far back as 1995, that has been the term the industry has used forever.

Replying with a dismissive "doubtful" demonstrates that you don't know what you're talking about.

	▲	rvnx 3 hours ago \| parent [-]
		Yes, doubtful it is not fraud, just because you didn’t sign a contract does not prevent it from being fraud. And it is fine to use the terms click fraud when you conduct artificial clicks with the intent: Examples: https://integralads.com/insider/what-is-click-fraud/#:~:text... One of the top leading company of traffic filtering is literally using these words to describe that. Other users even 10 years ago: https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=13328628 + sources from court: > The opinion states: “click fraud” can occur when “either a (natural) person, automated script, or computer program, sometimes referred to as a `bot,’ simulates the click activity of a legitimate user by clicking on the Program Data displayed, but without having an actual interest in its subject matter or content.” Etc