Yep. And, like a sensible user of language, I recognised that it could be stretched to include your odd definition, but chose to stay with the combination of what was written in the dictionary and what is the common-use definition because the rest of the English-speaking world is under no obligation to stretch out the definition to help you. Everyone knows what ads are. Only a particularly obtuse user of language would call 'an intrusive video, put in front of you for the benefit of other people and the detriment of society' and 'a label of manufacturer of the object you are currently looking at, being used as an identifier' the same thing. They don't look alike. They don't serve the same purposes. One interacts with them in different ways. Only in the idiosyncratic space of marketing theory would one call them the same.