I'm not so sure the VideoEgg's frame is 'evil' like DiggBar's frame. It looks to me as if the ad is inserted into the current DOM at runtime and thus the URL for every page using the technology isn't a VideoEgg URL (could you imagine if an ad company told their customers that, from now on, their pages would be served-up with the ad company's URL?). If it doesn't take over the URL and is just nodes dynamically inserted into the DOM at runtime, then no harm done, right?
Exactly, this is a totally different beast which requires the website author to put the VideoEgg content on their site explicitly.
The article on TechCrunch seems to be written with little understanding of the toolbar or how it actually works.
The web would be another beast all together if it wasn't for ads. Look at all the Newspapers that are crumbling but still publishing online. The CS monitor recently stopped printing but for a weekender though it updates its website every day. Sites need ads for revenue and I don't think VideoEgg's bar is too intrusive. In fact I wouldn't mind a bar like that on a tv if it meant shows didn't have to pause for a break every ten minutes. I could see it running on the bottom of online videos too instead of having an ad run at the start.