  Dunga BeePut A Little Butter On It
join:2004-07-26
USA | Good Response That letter was a nice read. It's always nice to see lawyers find nice ways to tell someone to shove off 
Spyware / Adware is so out of control these days, I am glad issues like this are getting the press they are. It only serves to draw attention to this issue. IMO. | |
|
 | | | Re: Good Response Nice, though it had several grammar issues. | |
|
| | | | Re: Good Response Yes, nice, but the grammar issues did detract from it. It's somewhat disappointing to see that the person defending this issue can't even write well. ("...in a MANNER of minutes..."?)
Yikes. | |
|
| | |  W8ASATieng gi vay?
join:2000-07-31
Dayton, OH | Re: Good Response heh heh: What's the matter with manner? heh heh | |
|
| | | |
| | | |  ROCINANTEOriginal Member 007Premium
join:1999-06-29
Hartsdale, NY | Re: Good Response Comma splicing?
--
CRUNCH THIS!
| |
|
| | | | |  Grail KnightQui audet adipisciturPremium
join:2003-05-31
Valhalla
kudos:6
 ·Time Warner Cable
| Re: Good Response First error I see is the use of “It's”, there is no ownership in this instance so “It is” would be used.
Can't should be "cannot".
Silly grammar nitpicking yet it was pointed out for the Vendor's lawyer showing we all make mistakes.
--
Mozilla/5.0 (Windows; U; Windows NT 5.1; en-US; rv:1.7.6) Gecko/20050223 Firefox/1.0.1 Aviary--Thunderbird version 20050222 1.0.1 Aviary | |
|
| | | | | |  tapeloopNot bad at all, really.Premium
join:2004-06-27
Airstrip One
kudos:1 | Re: Good Response said by Grail Knight:First error I see is the use of “It's”, there is no ownership in this instance so “It is” would be used. Can't should be "cannot". Silly grammar nitpicking yet it was pointed out for the Vendor's lawyer showing we all make mistakes. Um...you do know that "it's" is a contraction of "it is" right? So the 2 can be used interchangeably.
»www.cgl.uwaterloo.ca/~csk/its.html
»www.stormloader.com/garyes/its/#top
»www.wsu.edu/~brians/errors/its.html
Use of "can't" is a preference. While grammatically correct, one should avoid the use of contractions in formal correspondence. I don't think internet message boards qualify. 
Appropriate that you would choose "it's" to nitpick, considering that you seem to be a Python fan.  | |
|
| | | | | | | Grail KnightQui audet adipisciturPremium
join:2003-05-31
Valhalla
kudos:6 Reviews:
·Time Warner Cable
| Re: Good Response The Knights who say "Ni--!".
Of course my ref. to grammar was in jest to those that would pick others apart. Granted a lawyer should have proof read his work.
--
Mozilla/5.0 (Windows; U; Windows NT 5.1; en-US; rv:1.7.6) Gecko/20050223 Firefox/1.0.1 AviaryThunderbird version 20050222 1.0.1 Aviary | |
|
| | | | | | | | tapeloopNot bad at all, really.Premium
join:2004-06-27
Airstrip One
kudos:1 | Re: Good Response Heh. So by criticizing your post satirizing people who criticize grammar, I created a sort of recursive irony.
"NOBODY expects the Spanish Inquisition!!!"
Man, maybe I should get some work done today... | |
|
| | | | | | | | |  antwanpBeyond FM, Beyond AM, XM Satellite RadioPremium
join:2002-05-14
Cedar Hill, TX | Re: Good Response Lol!
-Antwan L. | |
|
| | | | | | | | | Grail KnightQui audet adipisciturPremium
join:2003-05-31
Valhalla
kudos:6 | Well if this darn snow would go away I could tend to my shrubbery! | |
|
| | | | | | | | |  wolfoxGentle Wolfox
join:2002-11-27
Dunnellon, FL | Re: Good Response With a herring? | |
|
| | | | | |  pc319Premium
join:2002-04-24
North Royalton, OH
1 edit | I thought that the word "it's" is another way to say "It is". That is what the apostrophe is for.
I think the word you are thinking of is "its" signifies ownership.
edit: nevermind I see that tapeloop posted that before me | |
|
| tapeloopNot bad at all, really.Premium
join:2004-06-27
Airstrip One
kudos:1 | Like Emeril would say... In addition, Symantec, Lavasoft, Computer Associates, Spyware Warrior, Spyware Blaster,
and Doxdesk, to name a few, report that the iSearch toolbar, published by iDownload is spyware
(see links below). This information is publicly available and was obtained in a manner of minutes
using the iDownload “brand” as a search term.
BAM!!!!!
Dear iSearch: if you're going to sue us, you gotta sue ABC too. And Symantec. And Lavasoft. And Computer Associates. And Google. And the list goes on and on...
It's cool that CastleCops were so chill about it though. "Yeah, we know you might not agree with us. The matter is still up for discussion." Class. | |
|
| awluck
join:2000-05-24
Duluth, GA | Re: Good Response Rambling.... And probably far afield.
What is required is a new word. A term of art which is specifically designed to identify software which :
(any and/or all) of the following:
a. installs illicitly (either without the user's knowledge or consent, or under false pretenses);
b. relies upon fraud or deceit for distribution;
c. relies upon security holes in existing software for distribution;
d. covertly intercepts or analyzes data or data streams for third party purposes;
e. generates computer activity deleterious to the efficient and effective function of user-desired computer activity;
f. presents data to the user which has not been intentionally requested and is not part of the originally installed operating system;
g. attempts to obscure its true activities through non-technological means (legalese or PR flak or FUD);
h. provides no opportunity for complete un-installation;
i. resists attempts by end-user to circumvent or un-install;
Before the witticisms begin ("Oh , well, you've just described MS Windows", "What software doesn't fall into some of those categories?", etc.), I think the problem can be divided into two parts.
Intention of the end user vs. intention of the _____ware distributor.
Obfuscation for propagation.
A. I expect the device to work a certain, predictable way. When it doesn't, there are two logical reasons.
1. Some thing is not doing what it is supposed to do.
2. Something is doing exactly what it is supposed to do.
If A.1., there is a hardware or software flaw.
If A.2., there is _____ware installed.
What is needed is the application of laws like trespass, breaking and entering, voluntary conversion, misappropriation, theft, vandalism, deception with intent, etc. We could start with some of the big mainstream old-line media outlets that employ means to circumvent anti-pop-up software that is installed by the end-user.
My computer is mine, just like my house. If you come in without my permission or through deception, I want to be able to put you in jail.
What happened to the concept that if I say "I think you are a s***head", it isn't slander, but if I say "You are a child molester" then it is.
What is ____ware is an opinion. The fact the a whole lot of people tend to agree shouldn't change the fact the it is still an opinion. The fact that a whole lot of people act on someone else's well-formed opinion isn't actionable. After all, we aren't calling these people child molesters, are we?
--
.sig under development | |
|
| | awluck
join:2000-05-24
Duluth, GA | Re: Good Response Infestware | |
|
|  fireflierCoffee. . .Need CoffeePremium
join:2001-05-25
Limbo | From the iDownload's attorney cease and desist letter:
". . .to protect iDownload from your continuing tortuous conduct"
Torturous conduct? Give me a f***ing break. The only people being subjected to torturous conduct are the end users who constantly have to deal with unsolicited crap from these companies.
--
When people are free to do as they please, they usually imitate each other. | |
|
| |  jester121Premium
join:2003-08-09
Lake Zurich, IL
 ·voip.ms
| Re: Good Response Errr... they didn't say "torturous" (meaning related to torture).
They said "tortuous", which means winding, twisting, complex. That doesn't make sense either.
I'm pretty sure they meant "tortious", as in "tort law", meaning injurious, damaging, wrongful.
(this concludes the grammar portion of today's thread.) | |
|
| | | fireflierCoffee. . .Need CoffeePremium
join:2001-05-25
Limbo | Re: Good Response Whoops. My mistake. Guess I skimmed it a little too fast.  | |
|
Burny
join:2002-10-02
Montgomery, AL | Die, Scumware! This Legal BS has got to stop. | |
|
 woody7Premium
join:2000-10-13
Torrance, CA |  Hmmmm......
lawyer : sir, madame do you own a computer, do you get on the internet,has your computer been rendered useless?
sorry you are not what we are looking for in a jurist, have a nice day
--
BlooMe | |
|
kaila
join:2000-10-11
Lincolnshire, IL | With products like they offer.... There is no way Isearch can back themselves legally on this one. My guess is they have no intention of following through and are really doing this as a cheap way to see if anti-spyware groups will be intimidated enough by an attorney letter to get off their backs- the odds are against it, but worth a try.
Spyware makers in general really can't push very hard legally. If they did, the resulting PR would bloody them severely and likely result in regulations that would put them completely on the other side of the law. | |
|
| | | Re: With products like they offer.... I completely agree. I think that they are hoping that the threatened websites cave in and stop telling everyone about ISearch's malware/spyware nature. The most I could see them doing is filing suit and then trying to settle out of court with the provision that the site stop calling their application spyware/malware (ala PCPitStop). This would be quite risky for them though as there is no hard and fast definition of spyware. The site could easily say that, according to their spyware definition, ISearch falls well within the Spyware category. (And, given what ISearch does, it wouldn't be too hard to make a definition that includes ISearch.)
--
-Jason Levine
http://www.jasons-toolbox.com/
http://www.PCQandA.com/
http://www.urateit.com/ | |
|
| | | I tend to agree. However, I think that, if they find some measure of success, they'll use it as leverage against anti-spyware software vendors to force them to de-list their software. If they can muddy the waters enough, they can start arguing semantics of what is and isn't spyware, then they'll argue that programs like Spybot shouldn't be targeting them. They may even go so far as to sue someone, claiming that they're distributing legitimate software that people want, and these anti-spyware vendors are "hackers" who are targeting their software out of some misguided belief that it's spyware and not the legitimate, wildly popular software that it is. | |
|
 TransmasterDon't Blame Me I Voted For Bill and Opus
join:2001-06-20
Cheyenne, WY | Well I still like my reply:
Dear Isearch;
Kiss My Ass
Sincerely Yours
A Lawyer In Love | |
|
| wtansillNcc1701
join:2000-10-10
Falls Church, VA
1 edit | Re: Well said by Transmaster:I still like my reply: Dear Isearch; Kiss My AssSincerely Yours A Lawyer In Love Great response! Way too much "pussyfooting around" these days (in all possible senses of that phrase), and a disastrous shortage of backbone.
--
That which does not kill me merely prolongs the agony. | |
|
|
|
