antdude
A Ninja Ant
Premium,VIP
join:2001-03-25
|  Symantec Files Suit Against Hotbar in Adware Case
»investor.news.com/Engine?Account···07006162
"CUPERTINO, Calif.--(BUSINESS WIRE)--June 7, 2005--Symantec Corp. (SYMC - news), the global leader in information security, today announced that it has filed suit against Hotbar.com, Inc. The suit asks the court for a ruling supporting Symantec's right to detect certain Hotbar program files as adware and to empower customers with the ability to remove the files from their computers."
--
Ant @ The Ant Farm: »antfarm.ma.cx ... Please do not IM/e-mail me for technical support. Use the forum (I check almost daily)! Disclaimer: The views expressed in this posting are mine, and do not necessarily reflect the views of my employer. |
|
mers2
Premium,MVM
join:2004-03-20
USA
clubs: | Re: Symantec Files Suit Against Hotbar in Adware C
Excellent. Kudos to Symantec for taking the offensive. They have the money to do so and I for one applaud them. |
|
SnowyOne
Premium
join:2003-04-05
Kailua, HI
 ·RoadRunner Cable
 ·Clearwire Wireless
| said by mers2  :Excellent. Kudos to Symantec for taking the offensive. They have the money to do so and I for one applaud them. Dittoed |
|
Doctor Four
My other vehicle is a TARDIS
Premium
join:2000-09-05
Dallas, TX | reply to antdude
Another thumbs up for Symantec. Maybe they'll also sue
Direct Revenue (featured prominently in a front page news
item today about AOL trusting their Aurora crapware). |
|
StraitShoot
Who Loves Ya Baby? - Theo Kojak
Premium
join:2003-02-08
Clinton, MA
1 edit | reply to antdude
Re: Symantec Files Suit Against Hotbar in Adware Case
Wow... this is great!
I for one, am proud to be a Symantec client!
Randy Bell, Come back! WE NEED YOU!
Symantec is leading the way for all the others., including their own competition... Good for them! I think this is great!
Jim:) |
|
jbob
Reach Out and Touch Someone
Premium
join:2004-04-26
Little Rock, AR
·Comcast
 ·AT&T Southwest
| reply to antdude
Re: Symantec Files Suit Against Hotbar in Adware C
Well let's just hope this doesn't become like a double edged sword. Symantec could lose depending on who makes the ruling and who has the best attornies arguments. Symantec could decide it is gonna become too expensive and cave with some kind of secret handshake. Let's hope not though. |
|
Owlbet
Ignite the Ice
Premium,MVM
join:2002-09-24
Palmer, AK
clubs:
·MTA Online
| reply to StraitShoot
Re: Symantec Files Suit Against Hotbar in Adware Case
said by StraitShoot :Symantec is leading the way for all the others., including their own competition... Good for them! I think this is great! I pray the courts rule in their (Symantec's) favor. It will set a precedent that should allow other anti-malware creators some leeway in their choice of detections without fear of retribution or lawsuit. Well done, Symantec.
--
Rocky is, was, and always will be Dawg E. Dawg. Miss you, pal. |
|
eburger68
Premium,MVM
join:2001-04-28
| reply to antdude
Re: Symantec Files Suit Against Hotbar in Adware C
Hi All:
This is indeed great news. There's an article about the Symantec suit here:
»www.businessweek.com/ap/financia···ech_down
Sunbelt posted a copy of its own response to Hotbar recently:
»sunbeltblog.blogspot.com/2005/05···bar.html
And JavaCool posted his own response as well:
»javacoolblog.blogspot.com/2005/0···nse.html
We shouldn't forget that Cloudeight had its own unpleasant run-in with Hotbar some months ago:
»thundercloud.net/infoave/truth-rant.htm
Finally, for the sake of completeness, here's a link to Ben Edelman's recent write-up on Hotbar's installation methods:
»www.benedelman.org/news/051605-1.html
Best,
Eric L. Howes |
|
SnowyOne
Premium
join:2003-04-05
Kailua, HI
·RoadRunner Cable
·Clearwire Wireless
| said by eburger68 :Hi All: ... Look what The Cat dragged in!  |
|
eburger68
Premium,MVM
join:2001-04-28
| SnowyOne:
You wrote:
said by SnowyOne :Look what The Cat dragged in! Yeah, I figured I better put in appearance here soon or people would figure I had dropped off the face of the earth.
For those wondering where I've been, May was an incredibly busy month. Not only did we finish the semester here at the University of Illinois, but I attended the CNET AntiSpyware Workshop out in San Francisco. And just after the semester ended I headed down to Clearwater, FL for a weeklong visit with the folks at Sunbelt (I consult part-time for Sunbelt).
So, needless to say, I've been scrambling to keep up with all my regular work (including the Rogue/Suspect list, where we're on the verge of hitting 200 listed applications). I do continue to work on spyware/adware issues -- almost all day long, in fact. Much of that work now happens "behind the scenes" as it were.
Also, I ought to tell folks that there will be an update to IE-SPYAD and AGNIS out soon, and it will be another monster update (no rest for the wicked or the righteous, it seems).
In any case, I do visit here several times a day, even if I don't always have time to post.
Best,
Eric L. Howes |
|
amysheehan
Premium,VIP,MVM
join:1999-12-21
Huntington Beach, CA
·RoadRunner Cable
| said by eburger68 :Also, I ought to tell folks that there will be an update to IE-SPYAD and AGNIS out soon, and it will be another monster update (no rest for the wicked or the righteous, it seems). In any case, I do visit here several times a day, even if I don't always have time to post. Best, Eric L. Howes Thanks for ALL you do, and a special thanks for the update information re: IE-SPYAD and AGNIS. We've had several inquiries made in the updates sticky...
Again, thank you Eric!
|
|
eburger68
Premium,MVM
join:2001-04-28
| reply to antdude
Hi All:
One other link that's worth posting for this discussion: Ben Edelman's table of threats against critics of spyware/adware companies:
»www.benedelman.org/spyware/threats/
The list is growing, and it's a sure thing that there are plenty of threats that aren't public knowledge at this point.
Best,
Eric L. Howes |
|
Mele20
Premium
join:2001-06-05
Hilo, HI
| reply to antdude
I am certainly glad that Symantec is taking the lead here.
I think it despicable that Hotbar targets children's sites. Obviously, children could be fooled, but I don't see how adults could be fooled. They tell you very clearly exactly what they are doing. There is no way an adult could claim they didn't know what they were getting if they read just the first two paragraphs of the "Terms of Use and License Agreement".
Hotbar installs with many Desktop themes so that you can have the theme for IE and OE also. I had Hotbar on my 98SE box for years. I neutered it so I never had any ads and it didn't call home either and I didn't even have the hotbar itself in IE. I just had the good stuff.
While I don't see how any adult could be mislead and not know they were installing adware, obviously kids could be (and they target kids sites) so I hope Symantec gets the ruling they are after.
--
Around 2005 a sudden spark will catalyze a Crisis mood. The very survival of the nation will seem to be at stake.Sometime before 2025, America will pass through a great gate in history. The risk and promise will be very high. The Fourth Turning Wm. Straus |
|
bedelman
Premium
join:2004-06-20
Cambridge, MA
| Would adults really understand?
Mele20, I'm interested in your suggestion that adults reasonably can and should understand what Hotbar is slated to give them.
In my recent review of Hotbar's practices ( »www.benedelman.org/spyware/insta···-hotbar/ ), I remarked that Hotbar never affirmatively showed its Terms of Use & License Agreement document to users as its software became installed. Rather, the installation procedure was as follows:
1) User sees banner ad on web site.
2) User clicks on said banner ad.
3) User clicks Yes once in ActiveX box (which says "Do you want to install and run Hotbar.com, a Microsoft Certified Partner, and do you agree to Hotbar's Terms of Use and License (click to review) ... ?").
4) User clicks Next in a box confirming that user wants "Free ad-supported version" (not a "paid version" which certainly sounds less palatable).
See »www.benedelman.org/spyware/insta···ils.html
So, if a user clicked on the link in step #3, perhaps the user would come to understand what you describe. But given the nature and presentation of the text in #3, it seems like few users are likely to click on it. Perhaps we could confirm this with some kind of empirical study.
Finally, even ifa user does click to view the license, I'm not so sure the disclosure at the top of the ToU is as good as you say it is. See »www.benedelman.org/spyware/insta···s.html#3 . The paragraphs at issue are all caps. The paragraphs say what data is and is not collected (mostly in negative form, not affirmatively admitting what is collected). But nowhere in the first page of on-screen text does Hotbar come out and say anything like "We will show the following-kinds of advertising: Pop-ups, sliders, toolbar ads, ..." Furthermore, placing this introductory text in all-caps makes it especially hard to read. So I really don't think it's a process such that (as you had claimed) an "adult could [not] claim [that he] didn't know what [he was] getting." |
|
Mele20
Premium
join:2001-06-05
Hilo, HI
| I based my comments on your review.:) Why wouldn't an adult click on the license review? Yeah, some wouldn't, but then it is their fault what they get for their laziness and hopefully they will learn from their mistake and read the Eulas in the future (or at least read the beginning of a Eula and try to look through all of it).
Now, if they click on the license, and they have to read 35 pages (in Caps no less although I personally far prefer it to all be in caps because I can read it. I can't read the tiny fonts that are usually used for Eulas so I commend Hotbar for using all caps), before they see anything that says ads are going to be delivered to their computers based on the information gathered from them and others who are using Hotbar, well that I would say is objectionable. But they tell you in the first two paragraphs (which you have in your screenshot) that you are agreeing to have your movements on the internet tracked and you are agreeing to accept Hotbar's ads in exchange for using Hotbar's smilies, OE/IE matching theme to your Desktop theme, etc.
How are they being deceptive? Because they don't specify that the ads won't just be banner ads but will be popups, popunders, etc? I would say that they are not legally obligated to spell that out and that the user should remember the age old adages "you don't get anything for free", "buyer beware", etc. Naivité and ignorance are not defenses under the law.
--
Around 2005 a sudden spark will catalyze a Crisis mood. The very survival of the nation will seem to be at stake.Sometime before 2025, America will pass through a great gate in history. The risk and promise will be very high. The Fourth Turning Wm. Straus |
|
hpguru
Curb Your Dogma
Premium
join:2002-04-12 |  reply to Mele20
Re: Symantec Files Suit Against Hotbar in Adware C
Disgusting. |
|
Name Game
Premium
join:2002-07-07
North Myrtle Beach, SC
| reply to antdude
Re: Symantec Files Suit Against Hotbar in Adware Case
This is what hotbar can do today..
»Microsoft AntiSpyware & WhenU / Hotbar
»Re: Microsoft AntiSpyware & WhenU / Hotbar
--
Gladiator Security Forum »www.gladiator-antivirus.com/ Missing Kids »www.missingkids.com/ |
|
too many lawsuits
@verizon.net
| reply to antdude
Re: Symantec Files Suit Against Hotbar in Adware C
I honestly don't understand this lawsuit - Symantec isn't suing for damages, and I'm not sure that they would have standing to do so in this case anyway. Is this a normal function of the court system, to hear suits requesting, essentially, a judicial definition of certain terms? And nothing more?
It all just seems a bit odd to me - shouldn't the owner of the PC, the end-user of the various software(s) in question - shouldn't *they* be the one with the power to decide what software does and doesn't get/stay installed onto their machine? After all, that PC is their private property, not the property of either Symantec, nor Hotbar.
I would think that a more powerful thing, would be for Symantec to offer legal indemnity to their customers, should their customers choose to use their software, to assist in the removal of other software on their machine. In that case, Hotbar might attempt to sue the end-user, and at that point Symantec could enter the case, legitimately I believe, and fight things from there. I would think that Symantec would have a much stronger position at that point, acting on behalf of the end-user, who was simply choosing to enforce their own software security policy over their computer, using Symantec's software as a tool to do so. |
|
jaa
Premium,MVM
join:2000-06-13
·Optimum Online
 ·Vonage
| reply to antdude
Re: Symantec Files Suit Against Hotbar in Adware Case
I just ordered a copy of NIS 2005 after reading this thread. I won't use it, but I'll give it way to someone. I just wanted to give some support to Symantec for having the balls to stand up to these guys.
--
NOTHING justifies terrorism. We don't negotiate with terrorists. Those that support terrorists are terrorists. |
|
hpguru
Curb Your Dogma
Premium
join:2002-04-12
| reply to too many lawsuits
Re: Symantec Files Suit Against Hotbar in Adware C
said by too many lawsuits:
I honestly don't understand this lawsuit - Symantec isn't suing for damages, and I'm not sure that they would have standing to do so in this case anyway. Is this a normal function of the court system, to hear suits requesting, essentially, a judicial definition of certain terms? And nothing more?
They are seeking to set a precedent. If successful this will help us all immeasurably.
--
Get hpHOSTS! Member ASAP
REMEMBER 1776! NEVER FORGET! |
|
