Marketers Try to Silence Spyware CriticDon't call our application 'Spyware'! ( old news - 10:31AM Tuesday Feb 22 2005) tags: Op/Ed · spyware The ISearch and IDownload applications have a long and sordid history of using clearly documented shady installation techniques; most recently making use of the WMP DRM vulnerability we've discussed at length. The company behind the apps have sent a "cease and desist" letter to security site Castle Cops, for classifying the applications as "Spyware": "This firm represents iDownload.com with respect to your inaccurate classification of iDownload's software product, iSearch toolbar, by referring to it as Spyware in its description. Specifically, a recent review of materials disseminated by your company, via the Internet, revealed that your company is falsely disparaging iDownload's product." The letter goes on to inform the site they will take legal action if they do not change their description of the ISearch and IDownload products. Not only can't the products be called "Spyware", they can't be called "Foistware" or "Malware" either. Why is this so important to them? Because the marketing industry knows that Congress is considering new laws cracking down on sleazy products. To avoid getting caught up in any nets, they've been engaged in a massive image makeover and PR campaign that so-far includes: •Reframing the debate by calling what they do "Adware", and what the "bad guys over there" do as "Spyware". They then pretend (See WhenU's "Spyware Removal tool") to be part of the solution, instead of part of the problem. •Legally pressuring or offering anti-spyware vendors marketing deals to exclude their applications from detection. •Joining anti-spyware consortiums, nearly leading to their dissolution. •Threatening on-line resources who refuse to play along with the new marketing industry coined definitions of what constitutes troublesome software. If you recall, Claria sued the PC Pitstop website some time ago for the same reason. We joked at the time that bank robbery must now be referred to as "professional forced fund reallocation." It's no longer funny. Corporate anti-spyware vendors seem unwilling to stand up to the industry and critics are being threatened. Does the future have us quietly huddled in IRC channels exchanging open-source applications that remove all marketing fodder without apology? Related:- AT&T: High SMS Prices A 'Faulty Notion'
- The FCC Finally Gets A New Boss
- Jamie Thomas Guilty -- A Song's Worth $80,000
- The Metered Billing Fight Is About To Get Ugly
- 'New' FCC, Same Regulatory Rubber Stamp For CenturyLink
- RIAA: The Majority Agrees With Us
- FCC Greenlights Centurytel/Embarq With Wimpy Conditions
- Mythbusters' Savage The Latest Socked With Huge 3G Bill
|
page: 1 · 2  |
 |  |   DaveNJ No Fear
join:1999-09-01 New Jersey | Re: This should go to court i agree, it corporate cohersion, Malware is Malware. | |
|  |  |   technick Premium join:2000-12-16 Loganville, GA
| Re: This should go to court That's very true, just like murder is murder, speeding is speeding. I can't believe the lengths that some of these companies are going to for their crappy products. But then again it puts food on their plates, so they are going to fight everything tooth and nail. -- "Our greatest glory consists not in never falling, but in rising everytime we fall." - Confucius - - - - - - - - - - - Streamfire.net- - AIM - CoNFuCiUsNiCk | |
|  |  |  |   dangerweasel Confirmed Luddite
join:2000-07-21 Portland, OR
| Re: This should go to court It doesn't just put food on the table, for a lot of these poeple it is putting Lexux's in their million dollar homes. There is no way they are going to go back to the small apartment they had in college before they discovered money to be made off of suckers and computer neophytes. | |
|  |  gh4456 Premium,VIP join:2004-04-07 Beverly Hills, CA | It will be interesting to see if they send a cease and desist order to Microsoft, for MS Antispyware for finding and deleting this undwanted junk.
DSL Tech | |
|  |  |   trparky Bite My Shiny Metal Ass Premium,MVM join:2000-05-24 Cleveland, OH clubs:
·AT&T U-Verse
| Re: This should go to court Steve: "Um...Bill, you just got a cease and desist letter?" Bill: "From who?"
As Bill opens the letter, he notices that it is from iSearch. As he starts to read it, he starts to chuckle.
Bill: "HAHAHA! These small fries are suing us Steve. I can't believe it! Must have been one of those automated letters, because anybody.......HAHAHAHA......in their right mind wouldn't sue us over this. Send it up to our legal department."
Bill tosses the letter over to Steve.
Bill: "Send it up there so that our legal boys can have a good laugh. Those guys don't laugh enough." -- WedgeAntilles250
Tom's Rant | |
|  |  |  tbeckner
join:2004-03-20 Bend, OR
| said by gh4456 :It will be interesting to see if they send a cease and desist order to Microsoft, for MS Antispyware for finding and deleting this undwanted junk. DSL Tech With Microsoft producing what will likely become the standard Anti-Spyware removal tool, these Adware/Spyware/Malware companies need to REMOVE ALL SHARP OBJECTS FROM THEIR POCKETS, BEND OVER and GRAB THEIR ANKLES and KISS THEIR ASS GOODBYE. They're just wasting their money batting at windmills. Or as it says at the end of some cartoons, "That's All Folks!". | |
|  |  |  |   DaveNJ No Fear
join:1999-09-01 New Jersey
·Comcast
·Patriot Media
·Cingular Wireless
| Re: This should go to court said by tbeckner : said by gh4456 :It will be interesting to see if they send a cease and desist order to Microsoft, for MS Antispyware for finding and deleting this undwanted junk. DSL Tech With Microsoft producing what will likely become the standard Anti-Spyware removal tool, these Adware/Spyware/Malware companies need to REMOVE ALL SHARP OBJECTS FROM THEIR POCKETS, BEND OVER and GRAB THEIR ANKLES and KISS THEIR ASS GOODBYE. They're just wasting their money batting at windmills. Or as it says at the end of some cartoons, "That's All Folks!". I am not convinced of that, simply because MS Antispy didnt find all malware on my as pc, as the others did. MS will just be another tool, not the end all of antispy. | |
|  |  |  |  |  tbeckner
join:2004-03-20 Bend, OR
1 edit | Re: This should go to court said by DaveNJ :I am not convinced of that, simply because MS Antispy didnt find all malware on my as pc, as the others did. MS will just be another tool, not the end all of antispy. You should remember Microsoft Anti-Spyware is a Beta and will be for at least another 5 months and Mr Gates has all the incentive in the world to make it either block directly and/or remove all Spyware/Adware from the machines, because if it doesn't Microsoft on the desktop could be in for major troubles. Plus, Mr Gates personal machines at home have never been hit by a virus/worm/trojan, but has been hit with spyware/adware. The need and incentive is there! Additionally, based upon Independent tests, Giant Anti-Spyware (Microsoft) was the best single product on the market, beating Spybot/Ad-Aware/Pest Patrol by sizable margins. And since I installed Microsoft Anti-Spyware on January 6th on my eight desktops, even though I continued to scan with all three scanners(Spybot/Ad-Aware/Microsoft), none of the scanners have found any malware. Of course, I used the built-in capability that already existed in IE to shutdown and block tracking cookies in December, so nothing has found tracking cookies either.
Additional Edit: What I was attempting to point out in the original post is that the Spyware/Adware people are finished. "That's All Folks!" Because they will never be able to reclassify their junk to be acceptable to Microsoft. They are wasting their time and money trying to reclassify with other websites or scanners. When Microsoft jumped into the fray, everything changed overnight. They just haven't woke up yet and realized that they are DEAD. These attempts to reclassify will not work on Microsoft and the Microsoft Anti-Spyware product will become the GOLD STANDARD in the next year.
So again, these Adware/Spyware/Malware companies need to REMOVE ALL SHARP OBJECTS FROM THEIR POCKETS, BEND OVER and GRAB THEIR ANKLES and KISS THEIR ASS GOODBYE, because they have hit the ultimate BRICK-WALL. | |
|  |  |  |  |  |  AquaBlaze Premium join:2004-02-02 Encino, CA
| Re: This should go to court said by tbeckner :These attempts to reclassify will not work on Microsoft and the Microsoft Anti-Spyware product will become the GOLD STANDARD in the next year. Microsoft's entry into the crapware hunt was a big mark, but I wouldn't write it up as "game over" yet. Plus, a Microsoft "Gold Standard"? Microsoft has some good products, but not everything they put a "Stamp of Approval" has been pure gold. Remember, this is the same company that let Windows ME escape from their beta testing labs not too far back.  | |
|  |  |  |  |  |  |  tbeckner
join:2004-03-20 Bend, OR
1 edit | Re: This should go to court said by AquaBlaze : said by tbeckner :These attempts to reclassify will not work on Microsoft and the Microsoft Anti-Spyware product will become the GOLD STANDARD in the next year. Microsoft's entry into the crapware hunt was a big mark, but I wouldn't write it up as "game over" yet. Plus, a Microsoft "Gold Standard"? Microsoft has some good products, but not everything they put a "Stamp of Approval" has been pure gold. Remember, this is the same company that let Windows ME escape from their beta testing labs not too far back. I agree with Windows ME (Windows ME wasn't important to Microsoft, Windows XP was), but Spyware/Adware is affecting Microsoft and Mr Gates directly and personally. And the future of Windows hangs in the balance, even the longhorn adoption could be affected.
BTW, even if it isn't the GOLD STANDARD right-away, it started out as the best single product on the market. And what I was attempting to point out, is that these Spyware/Adware/Malware companies do not have enough pull or money to stop Microsoft from classifying their junk as Malware and remove it. So since they cannot stop Microsoft from classifying their junk as junk, the "GAME IS OVER!", and they are wasting their time and money trying to change the mindset of second tier players. They can change everyone's mind, except Microsoft's and they have failed. In this one case, it is good to have a Monopoly that cannot be bought off. It is simple to see that "That's All Folks!". | |
|  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  AquaBlaze Premium join:2004-02-02 Encino, CA
| Re: This should go to court said by tbeckner :BTW, even if it isn't the GOLD STANDARD right-away, it started out as the best single product on the market. And what I was attempting to point out, is that these Spyware/Adware/Malware companies do not have enough pull or money to stop Microsoft from classifying their junk as Malware and remove it. So since they cannot stop Microsoft from classifying their junk as junk, the "GAME IS OVER!", and they are wasting their time and money trying to change the mindset of second tier players. They can change everyone's mind, except Microsoft's and they have failed. In this one case, it is good to have a Monopoly that cannot be bought off. It is simple to see that "That's All Folks!". I still say we'll have to just wait and see on this one. Perhaps MS will be a "gentle giant" among the ad/spyware companies, or maybe it will lay some major monopolistic smack-down on their asses, it is yet to be seen. The players are barely coming out onto the field, and yet you've already declared certain victory. Let MS buck a head or two in the ad/spyware market at least, and then we'll get a better idea of their intentions in the anti-spyware wars. | |
|  |  |  |  |  |  |  |   DreamWraith Premium join:2004-04-07 Mount Vernon, WA | i still fail to understand why you seem to thing it started as the "single best product on the market". your not making any sense. it is hardly up to par with AdAware SE. Let alone a combo of Spybot S&D and Adaware SE. | |
|  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |   anonymousexxx
@pacbell.n
| Re: This should go to court He says that because it is true. The MS product is just a repackaged version of Giant Antispyware, the company/product MS bought in toto. It is universally regarded as the best product. I was using adaware and spybot too until MS announced their new product would be free and spybot teatimer was defeated by the windupdate/adtools spyware attack (which can circumvent a currently fully patched SP2, grrr). So, your faith in the other two freeware products is not longer well placed. I'm here to tell you that the MS/Giant freeware is the best there is at this time...and it's free. I call that a win win win. | |
|  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  tbeckner
join:2004-03-20 Bend, OR
3 edits | said by DreamWraith :i still fail to understand why you seem to thing it started as the "single best product on the market". your not making any sense. it is hardly up to par with AdAware SE. Let alone a combo of Spybot S&D and Adaware SE. In Independent testing, five products where recommended, Ad-Aware, Giant AntiSpyware (Microsoft), Pest Patrol, Spybot Search & Destroy, and Webroot Spy Sweeper. No product tested found and removed 100% of the Spyware/Adware, but Giant (Microsoft) AntiSpyware removed almost 25% more items that the next best of the 25 products tested, which was Pest Patrol.
I would recommend that you review their testing criteria and methods and make your own judgement.
But since the Microsoft product is free for home or business use (including real-time protection) and is evolving quickly and has the support of a company that will likely not be bought off, has a multi-billion dollar vested interest in getting rid of Spyware/Adware, and has the software and R&D capability unmatched in the world, my bet is on them.
And based upon my review of the testing criteria and methods used in the testing and review, they started with the best product on the market.
Additionally, based upon the results I have had on my eight machine over the last 45 days, I am currently impressed.
It's not a slam dunk, but I believe if Vegas was betting, their money would be on Microsoft, and the odds would be overwhelmingly on their side.
Results of the October 2-4, 2004 tests:
Number of items found:
Spybot Search & Destroy: -- 40 of 134 Webroot Spy Sweeper: ----- 74 of 134 Ad-Aware: ----------------- 82 of 134 Pest Patrol: ---------------- 86 of 134 Giant AntiSpyware: -------- 100 of 134 (Microsoft)
»spywarewarrior.com/ | |
|  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |   DreamWraith Premium join:2004-04-07 Mount Vernon, WA
·Comcast
| hmm. havent seen those results anywhere before. thanks for the info. i guess i stand corrected. the funny thing to me is though, that just like everything else, microsoft has bought the tech. just like they bought dos. just like they stole the GUI. and just like they bought the engine that currently runs IE. | |
|  |  |  |  |  |  wehooper
join:2004-04-25 Spring City, TN
| Don't be too sure of it...
Article in the Register today says Microsoft paid a chunk to a Dutch portal because MS AntiSpyware mistakely blocked access to the site.
The article goes on to say "The incident may spark off a whole parade of court cases by web companies or even spyware merchants who believe that they are illegitimately expelled by Microsoft's anti spyware software"
Read about it here: »www.theregister.co.uk/2005/02/22···re_ilse/
Microsoft has deeper pockets and much more to loose. Isn't it logical that they become a larger and more attractive target? Check out the recent settlements and deals the company has made to end anti-trust actions. | |
|  |  |  |  |  |  |  tbeckner
join:2004-03-20 Bend, OR
2 edits | Re: This should go to court said by wehooper :Don't be too sure of it... Article in the Register today says Microsoft paid a chunk to a Dutch portal because MS AntiSpyware mistakely blocked access to the site. The article goes on to say "The incident may spark off a whole parade of court cases by web companies or even spyware merchants who believe that they are illegitimately expelled by Microsoft's anti spyware software" Read about it here: » www.theregister.co.uk/2005/02/22···re_ilse/Microsoft has deeper pockets and much more to loose. Isn't it logical that they become a larger and more attractive target? Check out the recent settlements and deals the company has made to end anti-trust actions. Actually, they might have more to loose, but that is only if they are wrong and in this case they where wrong, and they corrected this situation. Again, remember Microsoft has only been in this field since December. There is a learning curve. At least they weren't pulling WhenU from their detector! 
You might also want to read this review. I agree completely with their assessment. Even with the no product is perfect assessment.
Also, just to let you know I still scan all eight machines with Spybot Search & Destroy 1.3, Ad-Aware SE 1.05, and the current version of Microsoft AntiSpyware 1.0.509, because today no product is perfect.
Currently overlap of scanning products is required, so I am betting on the long-term capability of the company with the most to lose if they don't get rid of this malware and that is Microsoft. Even personally, Gates said last year that his personal machines have never been infected with a virus/worm/trojan, but we was angry because he had been infected with Spyware/Adware. There is something on a personal level, beyond the multi-billion dollar consequences.
»www.pcstats.com/articleview.cfm?···&page=10 | |
|  |   SSX4life Premium join:2004-02-13 | It it looks like a duck, acts like a duck, sounds like a duck, had "gozzlings" then it's a FREAKING DUCK.
--SSX-- | |
|  |  |  russotto
join:2000-10-05 Collegeville, PA | Re: This should go to court If it had goslings but acts like a duck it's probably a goose with an identity disorder.  | |
|  |  |  |   SSX4life Premium join:2004-02-13
| Re: This should go to court Well "WhenU" can be the gossling, seeing how it has an identiy crisis at the moment!
Yea my bad what ever they are called "ducklings" etc. lol
Anyway they should all BURN IN HELL
--SSX-- | |
|  |  |  |  |  averagedude
join:2002-01-30 Mesa, AZ | Re: This should go to court If only Sam Kennison was still alive. I can hear him now "Burn in hell, AAARRRRAAARRR, . . . . ". Too bad SAM is gone because there is so much good material for him now. | |
|  |  |  AquaBlaze Premium join:2004-02-02 Encino, CA
| said by SSX4life :It it looks like a duck, acts like a duck, sounds like a duck, had "gozzlings" then it's a FREAKING DUCK. Just wait until the legal system gets a hold of things. At that point, it's all up for grabs - logic means nothing there. Legally, to quote a comedian, they could rule that 2 + 2 = chair!  | |
|  |  AquaBlaze Premium join:2004-02-02 Encino, CA
| said by PhoenixDown :so a judge can laugh and toss it out and send it as a warning to the rest of these idiots. Laugh nothing, judges have gavels for a reason! They should put it to good use on the defendant's pointed heads.  | |
|  |  |   bent not broken Premium join:2004-10-04 Longmont, CO clubs: | Re: This should go to court Plaintif head. its not the anti-spyware thats sueing -- Pura Vida! | |
|  |  |  |  AquaBlaze Premium join:2004-02-02 Encino, CA
| Re: This should go to court said by bent :Plaintif head. its not the anti-spyware thats sueing Oh pish posh. We need to get someone with some legal balls to take THEM to court for a change. Whack their heads with the gavel BUT GOOD! | |
|  |   fireflier Coffee. . .Need Coffee Premium join:2001-05-25 Limbo | How about Assware? Is that acceptable to them? | |
|  |  |  TheWickerMan
join:2002-04-09 Enola, PA
| Re: This should go to court said by fireflier :How about Assware? Is that acceptable to them? Now, that's just not fair. It's extremely insulting to asses.  | |
|  |  |   Grethor Today Is A Good Day To Format
join:2004-04-14 Puyallup, WA clubs: | My ass is offended. Take it back or my ass will file a lawsuit in a Sanfrancisco court. | |
|  |   packetscan Premium join:2004-10-19 Bridgeport, CT clubs: | Mr McBride you tried this with SCO. It's not going to work here either! | |
|  |   keith2468 Premium,MVM join:2001-02-03 Winnipeg, MB
| Thing is, the malware vendor gets to choose which court he brings the suit in, because they are bringing the suit.
So reasonably the malware vendor will pick the most favorable court in any jurisdiction that they or the ASW vendor has a presence in.
It's not fair, but it is how it is.
So even the combined financial might of MS, CA, Symantec, Dell and IBM might fail. -- (Virus&Hijacking FAQ + Submit suspected malware + Backups FAQ + Security FAQ TOC) | |
|  |  |  See 7 replies to this post | |
  FLECOM Bay Networks Freak Premium join:2003-03-03 Miami, FL | watch out, dont step in the lawyers if i was Castle Cops i would photocopy my middle finger and fax it to them :lol: | |
|  |  theeinstein Premium join:2003-07-31 Fernandina Beach, FL | Re: watch out, dont step in the lawyers Exactly!!!!!!!!! | |
|  |   Transmaster Don't Blame Me I Voted For Bill and Opus
join:2001-06-20 Cheyenne, WY | I think a three word reply would work:
KISS MY ASS! | |
|  Cyron
join:2002-09-24 Charlotte, NC | Classification change I think they should change the terms "Spyware" & "Adware", to "Things the normal person doesn't want on their computer". | |
|  |   LiamJunket Premium join:2002-03-03 Ocean City, NJ
·Comcast
| Re: Classification change said by Cyron :I think they should change the terms "Spyware" & "Adware", to "Things the normal person doesn't want on their computer". That is a good idea. Why can't someone make a product that allows me to EASILY identify what software is installed and then have it remove that software no matter what its classification. Instead of calling their software anti-spyware or anti-adware, maybe they can call it anti-"keep your crap off my computer ware".:D -- My Web Page My Blog Join Red Room Forum | |
|   B Karefel
| wat u say here you may get sued.... if you refer to them as anything other than what they think they are.... of course... what we think they are and what we think the software provided is... may indeed be a different story...
my my my... I can't hardly beleive this nonsense | |
|  |  dcurrey
join:2004-06-29
·ViaTalk
| Re: wat u say here I think a generic name would work. No more spyware/adware/maleware
Call everything autoloading software.
To NOT BE classified as autoloading it would have to meet the following 1. Program must be downloaded from the net or run off CD. No activeX installs java installs etc. 2. Program install must specifically be run by user. Either the download or off the CD. 3. On installer can only install 1 program. 4. Installer must specifically inform user of what it is installing.
I am sure you could come up with better rules but you get the idea. With this type of setup should leave the spyware/adware companies much room | |
|  |  |   drkkgt Boo Premium join:2003-08-26 Whittier, CA
1 edit | Re: wat u say here Don't forget, installer must install an UNINSTALLER that removes everything about the program, including reg entries, misc bitmaps, dlls and folders associated with it and resets to previous entries. It should do this cleanly WITHOUT popping up a browser to ask if you are REAAAALLLLLLYYYY sure. -- "A computer lets you make more mistakes faster than any invention in human history - with the possible exceptions of handguns and tequila." -Mitch Ratliffe | |
|  |  |  |  TheWickerMan
join:2002-04-09 Enola, PA
| Re: wat u say here said by drkkgt :It should do this cleanly WITHOUT popping up a browser to ask if you are REAAAALLLLLLYYYY sure. ...especially multiple times. I hate that! I shouldn't let it annoy me so greatly, but damn!
I recently had to clean another machine, and this one uninstaller made me fill out some kind of form as to why I was removing it. At the bottom was a freeform text window. I entered "F*** you" there. Immature, I know, but then so are the people who design this crap. | |
|  |  |  |  |   drkkgt Boo Premium join:2003-08-26 Whittier, CA | Re: wat u say here oh that's immature? gosh, I do that on all of them. | |
|  |  |  |  |   Anonymous Premium join:2004-06-01 IA | Bullseye Network crap. | |
|  Plldwnyrpnts
join:2003-04-19 Chicago, IL
| Here's the solution They don't want to be referred to as spyware, sooooo refer to them as adware (if that's what they want) and market an adware removing product. If they want to be labeled as something else, label them that then make a product removing that label. How hard can that be?
I know, my newest product will be called....."Advert remover".
Remove all advertising software from your computer with just a click of a button with new "Advert Remover"
Can they sue me? | |
|  |   not wanted
| Re: Here's the solution I don't care what they call it.. the bottom line is for me.. it's "NOT WANTED-WARE"
PS: I reserve the right to violate any of thier stupid EULA's especially if I didn't want the "NOT WANTED-WARE" in the first freakng place..
Hey... do you think they will understnd that?
I doubt it  | |
|  |   yock TFTC Premium join:2000-11-21 Fairfield, OH
1 edit | If it smells like a rose... There are overtones to all of this that just aren't getting picked up by everyone's radar.
Since when do software companies get to decide whom is good and whom is bad? I thought that was the job of we consumers? Now, I'm not one for barring corporations from marketing to improve their image. There have been legitimate turn-around stories, though none dealing with the publicity companies directly that I'm aware.
Companies damn their credibility when they resort to vulnerability exploitation to get their message across. This activity should not be acceptable to consumers, and we must be willing to do everything in our power to avoid using these "products." That means migrating away from the products they exploit to do their work. Alternatives to Windows Media Player and Internet Explorer exist. Enhancements and fixes to the products are available, and their application is crucial if you wish to continue using them. You can also run as non-privileged users in any OS. This further complicates unauthorized adware installation by mitigating the threat of automatic software installation. -- Statistical correlation need not imply causation. Technical Nirvana | |
|   dadkins Can you do Blu? Premium,MVM join:2003-09-26 Hercules, CA | Ok, so let's call it what it ACTUALLY is CRAP-ware!
Who here(anywhere)want's that BS on their computers? Not ME!!! | |
|   OceanaJones
join:2004-10-18 Suffolk, VA
| Just change what you call it This is a simple solution, any program that is unknowingly, yet legally downloaded to a user's computer that changes its configuration,uses critical system resources and resist efforts to remove it, should be classified as Malware. A program's designation of Malware is a lot worse than many spyware programs that only seek to track harmless cookies. | |
|  rkhands
join:2000-08-18 Wheaton, IL
·Vonage
·Comcast
| We should sue these criminals we should sue these companies for trespassing, theft of CPU cycles, disk space, etc. Anything that installs itself on your (remember it is YOUR computer) without your knowledge or consent should be a considered a criminal act, no less than a burglar entering your home. -- Randy (StatsMan) Handshttp://www.statsman.info | |
|  |  thomasaddley
join:2005-02-21 London, ON | Re: We should sue these criminals Class Action Maybe | |
|  |  lesopp
join:2001-06-27 Land O Lakes, FL | My sentiments exactly. | |
|  |   bent not broken Premium join:2004-10-04 Longmont, CO clubs:
·Comcast Formerly ..
| I was wondering when someone would draw this paralel... If someone came into my home and started painting a billboard on my livingroom wall they would find themselves with an excess of holes in their body. I don't think that this is all that much different.
Here are some ideas for a class action:
Theft of CPU cycles = Theft of Electricity = Theft of Public Utility
If my neighbor pluged an extention cord into my outside outlet, and used it to power his home, I'd be pissed, and I bet that the PUC would have something to say about it.
Undesired Operation under FCC law? Probably not, but worth checking into.
When all is said and done, I personaly don't have any problems with spyware, adware, or malware because I don't go "ooohhhh free screensaver click click click" and I know what every peice of software that is installed on my pc's does.
Unfortunatly, not all people are as savy. Laws are supposed to protect stupid and/or ignorant people from themselves, but most of us would agree that the less regulation of the net and computing environment the better. Microsoft has taken good steps in the right direction by having some educational stuff built into Win XP sp2 "Whats the Risk?" and I think that this trend is positive.
What it really boils down to is caveat emptor "buyer beware" if you don't know how to use your tools, you probably shouldn't... -- Pura Vida! | |
|  |   keith2468 Premium,MVM join:2001-02-03 Winnipeg, MB
| quote: we should sue these companies for trespassing, theft of CPU cycles, disk space, etc. Anything that installs itself on your (remember it is YOUR computer) without your knowledge or consent should be a considered a criminal act, no less than a burglar entering your home.
The thing is you'd have to resort to a civil suit.
And if you lost, you and/or your lawyer would be out big bucks.
What is needed is legislation that defines the crimes -- the crimes you describe -- so that ASW companies, the police, DAs, etc., can battle these malware companies. -- (Virus&Hijacking FAQ + Submit suspected malware + Backups FAQ + Security FAQ TOC) | |
|  |   hangthescum
| Hang ALL SPAMMERS by their Balls !!! Hang those SCUMBAGS by their balls with barbed wire !!!
The only good SPAMMER is a dead SPAMMER !!!! | |
|  |   Doctor Four My other vehicle is a TARDIS Premium join:2000-09-05 Dallas, TX
·AT&T U-Verse
·RoadRunner Cable
·AT&T Yahoo
3 edits | Re: Hang ALL SPAMMERS by their Balls !!! Actually these are spyware vendors, but the same applies to them as to spammers. And the rules of spam are easily adapted to spyware vendors:
1) Spammers Spyware Vendors lie.
2) If a spammer spyware vendor seems to be telling the truth, see rule #1
Oh, and ISearch/IDownload, your application is spyware/ crapware/malware. So sue me. Or is this another cart00ney legal threat the likes of which spammers send?
Face it, these morons don't have a case, and they know it.
And even if this gets as far as the lawsuit stage, I'm sure that ISearch/IDownload won't mind the discovery process and have everything related to them and their shady marketing practices outed for anti-spyware advocates to find out about. Knowing the weasels they are, they'll quietly drop the case before it ever gets to the discovery phase. -- "Kayura or Badamon, whichever you are, you should know that I will never give up this battle. By the will of the Ancient, I shall succeed!" - Shuten (Anubis) from the Ronin Warriors. To RIAA/MPAA - You can sue but you can't catch everyone! | |
|   IhatemyISP MM3 Corbski Premium join:2003-01-27 Goose Creek, SC | Just FYI Just so you guys know...
Isearch and Idownload are spyware  | |
|   Jason Levine Premium join:2001-07-13 Albany, NY
| They are Malware in my book I'd term Adware as an application that displays ads and tells the user up front that it will do so. It must not install itself via any nefarious means (e.g. drive-by downloads) and must provide an easy and effective uninstall utility. Using this definition, an example of Adware would be Opera's free ad-supported version. (Note that this definition means that Adware wouldn't be a bad thing because it would be something you would *choose* to have on your computer.)
My personal definition of spyware is an application that, without clearly informing the user, sends personal information about the user (including browsing habits) to a master server. Spyware may also be installed via nefarious means and may not provide a clear means of uninstalling it.
Malware (to continue my personal definitions), is an application that installs itself via nefarious means, takes active measures to prevent it's removal from the system, and/or makes changes to the system settings (including, but not limited to home page and search preferences) without properly informing the user.
Now iSearch (according to Symantec's write-up), "is a search hijacker and also tracks user activity on a remote server at isearch.com." If all they did was track user activity to display ads, then they *might* be able to argue themselves into the Adware category. Provided that they informed users properly and don't install their application via nefarious means, of course.
But they don't do either. iSearch can be installed via nefarious means (drive-by download) and thus won't properly inform the user of the actions that it will take (phoning home). This alone puts them into the Spyware category in my book. But then they go and hijack the user's search preferences. That pushes them over into my definition of Malware.
Now, they may sue me for saying this, but this is my own personal opinion and last I checked we were still allowed to have our own opinions. -- -Jason Levine http://www.jasons-toolbox.com/ http://www.PCQandA.com/ http://www.urateit.com/ | |
|   borborpa Slipping Slowly Into Oblivion Premium join:2002-02-20 New Cumberland, PA clubs:
·Speakeasy
| If they don't want to be classified that way... The don't produce spyware.
Isearch is a HUGE pain to get rid of. All the spyware programs see it, but it hides itself in an EXE, and everytime you clean it, it re-does itself. None of the spyware tools get rid of that EXE, you have to manually find it. Of course, it's not just one filename either, it's random.
Yeah, that sounds legitimate to me... -- Dr. Bunsen Honeydew and Beaker in 2008!!! [AIM - BoyBandsMakeUGay] | |
|  |  AquaBlaze Premium join:2004-02-02 Encino, CA
| Re: If they don't want to be classified that way.. said by borborpa :Yeah, that sounds legitimate to me... Sounds like legitimate business practices where Enron and the ilk are considered standard operating procedures. The entire corporate accountability has been steadily sliding downhill for years, this is yet another visible sign of such. | |
|   NyQuil Kid 8f The Nyquil Kid
join:2001-01-06 Brick, NJ
·Comcast
·Verizon Online DSL
1 edit | A combination of factors... As with many things, there are a combination of factors leading to this mess:
1) It is insanely easy to install such malware (insert your own term here) on a Windows box. BHO's, having IE as your default browser and not knowing how to secure it (and even then not being able to since so many customized web apps use Active X, etc) provides an easy target for these companies. This doesn't happen on MacOS or Linux (true, their market shares are lower, but at this point who cares..).
2) The law is usually behind such technological trends; sometimes this is a good thing, as it allows technology to shape the landscape unfettered. In this case, however, the law is too behind the times and needs to catch up.
3) Intimidation on the part of these companies is at an all-time high; intimidation only works if the target succumbs easily...perhaps it's time for the targets (Castle Cops, etc) to stand up and say "I dare you to follow through on your threat".
No doubt there are other factors that I haven't listed, but you get the jist...if I were a company being targeted by malware producers, I would tell them to stick it where the sun doesn't shine...
[8F] The NyQuil Kid -- [8F] The NyQuil Kid comes into town not looking for trouble... n00bz gang up, but he ain't seein' double,... pulls and draws, his deagles two... n00bz litter the ground you know it's true. | |
|  |   BuriedCaesar It's Not Polite To Stare.
join:2004-03-27 Richardson, TX
·AT&T U-Verse
·AT&T Yahoo
| Re: A combination of factors... said by NyQuil Kid : ...It is insanely easy to install such malware (insert your own term here) on a Windows box. BHO's, having IE as your default browser and not knowing how to secure it (and even then not being able to since so many customized web apps use Active X, etc) provides an easy target for these companies... Wouldn't be surprised if this is helping greatly to contribute to the ever-growing number of reports every day in the mainstream media that are saying M$IE is being dropped in favor of Firefox or other browsers... -- That was preposterous! Utter Nonsense! Totally unsupportable drivel! You can't be serious!....Um, what did you say? | |
|  |  |   NyQuil Kid 8f The Nyquil Kid
join:2001-01-06 Brick, NJ 1 edit | Re: A combination of factors... No argument here - that's one main reason why I switched to Firefox and Thunderbird months ago.
[8F] The NyQuil Kid | |
|   Da22in Buck Fush
join:2002-06-10 Charlotte, NC clubs: 
| See ya in court! Dear spyware law firm,
The company you represent indeed produces spyware and engages in questionable practices common to spyware, spyware vendors, and their ilk. We will continue to classify your product correctly as spyware, and are proceeding with an increased publicity campaign to inform the public, and more importantly, inform the United States Congress of the spyware threat and deceptive practice your client engages in.
I look forward to litigation, which will shed even greater light on this scourge and how your client contributes to it.
Cease and desist...bah! -- How much time are you in front of a computer? Protect your health with a Himalayan rock salt crystal lamp. | |
|  |  Aardula
join:2004-12-15 East Chicago, IN | Re: See ya in court! Ahhh! That should call their bluff. | |
|   2kmaro Think Premium,ExMod 1 BC join:2000-07-11 ColossalCave clubs:  
| David vs Goliath? said by BBR Commentary: Corporate anti-spyware vendors seem unwilling to stand up to the industry and critics are being threatened.
The question may be one of size. I picture most, if not all but one (I'll get to that one soon enough), of the anti-spyware tool makers as being small companies. Corporations in name only at best. Under most state's laws it only takes 3 people to incorporate anyhow. So the way it appears in my mind is that a bunch of small businesses (anti-spyware app makers) are suddenly confronted with spyware, adware, foistware, CRAP-TO-WASTE-MY_TIMEware that have enormous financial resources at their disposal to browbeat the smaller, less financially capable proponents of privacy.
Ask yourself, how many people do you envision "on staff" at places like SpamCop, or at Lavalys (AdAware)? Compare that to some company with business dealings to provide advertising to very large companies. Who is David and who is Goliath.
Now, to that one anti-spyware maker that might just be big enough to stand up to the whole lot: Microsoft Corporation. I was truly rather pleased to see them purchase Giant Anti-Spyware primarily because of their size. They definitely have the resources to keep a product up to date, keeping up with new crapware in the same fashion that companies like McAfeee, Symantec and Kaspersky keep up with freshly released viruses, trojans and worms. They also have the financial resources to resist the intimidation efforts of just about anyone they care to take on, including the DOJ . -- then think again! | |
|  |   Karl Bode News Guy join:2000-03-02
Host: Road Runner PC gaming GAMES PC gaming Tech
| Re: David vs Goliath? I see it playing out as such:
Small anti-spyware vendors fold easily to legal pressure that their apps are removing products users have signed a EULA for, so small outfits back down.
Large outfits might have the legal firepower to stand tough, but they'll more likely succumb to the cash pull of marketing cooperation (like Aluria, who struck a deal with WhenU and provides AS services for AOL).
That leaves privacy advocates who want it ALL removed (even if they accidentally clicked on a 74 page EULA) with open-source apps who won't bend to pressure (at least until they start selling product) as their only option. | |
|   Grail Knight Who Dares Wins Premium join:2003-05-31 Erie, PA 1 edit | Orwell 2005 A multi-use button to use while installing software, we shall call it the "Crapware" Button.
Just like an email letter that is marked spam the Crapware Button instead alerts the government to vendors breaking the law.
Just a dream. | |
|  | |  |
|
|