joebear29
join:2003-07-20
Alabaster, AL
| reply to Karl Bode
Re: This is asinine
said by Karl Bode  :Foster notes that's Microsoft's stance: quote:
Silly me - I should have guessed. Of course, Microsoft isn't violating anyone else's EULA. It's you, the Windows AntiSpyware customer, who is solely responsible for violating your solemn contractual agreement with Claria, DirectRevenue, or whomever. You have a solemn contractual agreement with Microsoft that says so.
Personally the EULA issue doesn't interest me. What interests me is Microsoft facing a choice: Improve their security standing by sticking to their definitions of ad/spyware, or morphing those definitions like Aluria did at the behest of adware vendors, after being offered lucrative marketing deals..... Yeah, I read that bit. He still seems to think the only reason Microsoft is not violating Claria's EULA is because a sentence in Microsoft's EULA shifts that burden to the user, as opposed to the real reason, which is no one (not even Microsoft) can violate a contract they did not agree to.
But that silliness aside, I do agree the main issues is whether Microsoft can maintain the integrity of the spyware removal product. I agree with you, in that I doubt they can, even if they had the best intentions; Microsoft is simply too large and vulnerable to bad press and lawsuits that adware types can bring to bear if they feel their software is unfairly listed.
Spyware removal is a game for small businesses or non-profits, not corporate behemoths. |
Karl Bode
News Guy
join:2000-03-02
Host:
Road Runner
PC gaming GAMES
PC gaming Tech
| They're Microsoft, they could do pretty much anything they like, but they won't.
Shame too, because it's a good shot for them to dig in their heels and establish themselves as serious about PC security.
Of course if they were serious about PC security they'd update non XP2 versions of IE, so I suppose that's a moot point.  |
