Marcia - 9:35 pm on Nov 16, 2005 (gmt 0)

It seems that what they'll be doing is creating a white list of clean companies/apps that don't come bundled without disclosure, but what is that supposed to do about all those that don't make the white list and couldn't care less whether they do or not?

Under the plan, which will undergo a test phase until next spring, providers of downloadable programs would have to ensure that there is prominent notification that spyware or adware is included and explain what the code does. There must be easy means of deleting the spyware or adware, and the origin of the advertising must be clearly displayed. Downloadable applications that meet the criteria would then be placed on a "white list" of certified programs that are safe to download. The participating Internet companies will not distribute, or advertise on, programs not on the list.

Ensure to whom? And by whom is it enforceable? Also, it only pertains to "participating" companies, not the ones that bundle trojan-like apps and have mechanisms to over-write affiliate cookies with their own. Those won't participate, who's gonna make them?

Google's right, it needs more teeth to it. How about some education exposing the tactics used, including publicizing names of applications and the companies paying out big advertising dollars to get visitors through BHOs?

I think we'd be hard put to find very many big ecom outfits out there that aren't directly or indirectly, with or without knowledge, actively supporting the continuance of those rogue apps with their ad dollars.