 CCCMTech Premium,VIP,MVM join:2002-05-17 Pound, VA
1 edit | *ware is like *nix With the exception of freeware it's all invasive.
[edit] Since noone else is posting I figured I would elaborate some.
Personally I think this is a step in the right direction, but like most all bills relating to malware, etc. It would be hard to prosecute any foreign company which is probably what we will start seeing. That and larger EULAs. | |
|
  justin Australian join:1999-05-28 Brooklyn, NY
Host: IPv6 Business Connectiv.. Home/Office setup .. Console/Handheld g.. Console Tech
| Support the bill if big business oppose it As far as i am concerned if big business hate this bill because they have to be just a little bit careful not to run afoul of it when installing call-home plugins on your PC, and that is the main reason they oppose it, then the bill is great and should be supported.
There are legal rules in print advertising they have to live with, they should live with legal rules online as well. I can't think of how consumers would lose if software companies have to detail to you, the user whenever they are going to change the function of YOUR pc so that it sends back MORE information, or other 3rd parties, than it did before. | |
|
 |  CCCMTech Premium,VIP,MVM join:2002-05-17 Pound, VA | Re: Support the bill if big business oppose it I agree with the must be great if businesses hate it, for the most part anyway.
The biggest problem I see is enforcement. -- Thank you for choosing SBC Internet Services. My name is Rick. How may I help you today? | |
|
 |   Overdrive Are You Where You Want To Be? Premium join:2001-05-31 Waterbury, CT
| EULA: who really reads them... I glance through it if it is a free/shareware prog to see if it is installing spyware... but with all of the mumbo-jumbo in there I wonder if even a lawyer could disect 'em.
that is of course my opinion. -- Need a Web Developer? | |
|
 |  |  CCCMTech Premium,VIP,MVM join:2002-05-17 Pound, VA
| Re: Support the bill if big business oppose it EULAs are like a CYOA clause, but this only prevents prosecution on the basis of "they didn't know it was going on"
If the outlaw it, it will bring up questionable suits, basically the EU agreed to install such software and had a chance to opt out, etc. -- Thank you for choosing SBC Internet Services. My name is Rick. How may I help you today? | |
|
 |  |   dvd536 as Mr. Pink as they come Premium join:2001-04-27 Phoenix, AZ
| said by Overdrive : EULA: who really reads them... I glance through it if it is a free/shareware prog to see if it is installing spyware... but with all of the mumbo-jumbo in there I wonder if even a lawyer could disect 'em.
that is of course my opinion.
When i see "Third party" in the install agreement the software goes into the bit bucket, not my hard drive. -- You can never be too rich, too thin or have too much Bandwidth | |
|
 |  |
 |  |
 |  |  CCCMTech Premium,VIP,MVM join:2002-05-17 Pound, VA
| Re: Support the bill if big business oppose it I know, so I think the EULAs will be expanded upon to include such malware and HOPEFULLY an option to opt out. Most EULAs mention spyware now if you can read through all 10,000 words. -- Thank you for choosing SBC Internet Services. My name is Rick. How may I help you today? | |
|
 |  niko01
join:2004-01-19 Houston, TX
| "Big business" opposes it because the definition draws in potentially legitimate software that has nothing to do with spyware. That legit software may, or may not, comply with the technical terms of this bill. Vague bills encourage litigation.
What you are not being told is that "big business" includes a wide array of organizations opposing this bill, including the Center for Democracy & Technology. What you are also not being told is that this bill was bought and paid for by 1-800-Contacts, which is based in Sandy, Utah, and is the result of its ongoing battles with predatory pop-ups from competitors.
"Big business" has offered to work with the sponsors if the'd make the bill less about the technology and more about improper use of the technology... | |
|
  acehyde Tired. Premium join:2001-08-14 clubs:
| Finally! I think this is GREAT!
It's about time someone did something about companies installing software on a pc without the users express permission.
In some instances, I have found that spyware causes more harm than a virus infection. -- Nip it in the Bud! | |
|
  ewgny
join:2000-12-21 East Setauket, NY
| Bounty Hunter Installing Sh*t on peoples computers without their consent should be a Federal Crime. I'd love to be a Bounty Hunter and drag the scum like those LOP people in by their chin hairs. -- Have you hugged your Assault Rifle today ?? | |
|
  Morac
join:2001-08-30 Riverside, NJ
·Comcast
| Get consent I think any software (not just spyware/malware) that installs or updates itself without the consent of the user should be banned.
And I don't count clicking "OK" at the EULA agreement written in lawyerese at install time as consent.
1. A program should specifically say that it is going to be installed, what files will be installed and where and give you the option to cancel the install.
1a. If an installation program installs other software besides itself (like AIM does), it should give you the option to not install that software or at least tell you it will do so and give you the option to cancel the entire install.
2. If a program needs to self-update itself then it should ask you each time it needs to do so. There can be a check box where you can give future consent if you don't want it to ask you in the future.
Any software that doesn't follow these 2 simple rules should be illegal.
The only possible exception I might give is to automatic installation of OS critical patches and anti-virus updates. I only say that because morons would never update otherwise. Even that should at least tell you it is doing so though and give you the option to disable it. -- "snmp: the standard e-mail protocol on the Internet" - LinkSys user manual (page 17) | |
|
 |
  insomniac84
join:2002-01-03 Schererville, IN | that bill is awesome I like how it says that the ability for the user to remove or hide the ads cannot be used as a defense. Now what is Gator going to do about people who call them spyware? According to Utah Law, they are spyware. | |
|
  verolom
join:2002-03-23 Eagleville, PA | AT&T and Verizon - spyware giants? I'm sorry, but since when did telecom companies start worrying about spyware? What is the source of this information? | |
|
 |   Varangian
join:2002-12-08 Collinsville, IL
| Re: AT&T and Verizon - spyware giants? I cant address them, but as it is my grim misfortune to yahoo support Ive got a pretty good idea. the giants are inserting spyware on their install disks. The Yahoo spyware isn't a big deal to a brand new 3Ghz machine, but it will suck the life out of a lesser one. And we have been expressly forbidden to directly assist the customers in cleaning the cr*p out. | |
|
  viperpa33s Why Me? Premium join:2002-12-20 Bradenton, FL
·Bright House
| We'll be left with the lax Federal law, How come the State's law is always more strict than a Federal law? If Utah's law gets signed by there governor, the more lax Federal law would void it. Just like the lax Can the Spam Act that voided the more strict law of Virginia.
As we seen from the lax Federal law with spam, people are getting more spam than ever. Sure you have some of the ISP's suing spammers but you don't see the Justice Dept. doing anything? Why, cause the law is so lax and has so many loopholes that they can't do a darn thing.
I surely hope there is no Federal law on spyware cause we will all be in trouble just like with the spam. | |
|
  SuperJudge Magus Premium join:2002-11-14 Albany, GA clubs: | Hah! Hahahhaahhahaha! Haaaaaaaaahahahahahha! -- Updated My Journal | |
|
 |
|
 |