Forum Moderators: skibum
Full story:
[foxnews.com...]
When you wish upon a star.
They’ll settle out of court and I won’t know a thing.
Regardless, these practices are unethical and are simply decieving and taking advantage the ignorant web population.
You mean like SEO?
Nonsense. AdWare is 100% pure creative genius.
The problem is not with AdWare Ad programs. They are brillant at taking advantage of an opportunity where available.
The problem?
The parasite is not a program that installs AdWare - the problem is with a browser that would allow such nonsense to be perpetrated on your system. The problem continues to be in Redmond. They could shut this whole thing down with 1 update of a few lines of code.
Ethics? How ethical was it for Microsoft last week when they put out "trusted email" feelers?
All of this nonsense about AdWare needs to point at the realy problem - Redmond.
Me, I've not seen an unwanted popup in years. The problem is not with Gator - the problem is with Redmond. Quite making apologies for them by focusing on gator.
baloney..this is on the person holding the adware gun.. Gator is the one shooting..
You think this is bad?
Wait till the next OS.
Him: "I got a computer and broadband"
You: "I hope you have a firewall. You need a firewall."
HIM: "It didn't come with one, but it has built-in M$ security. I just want to see what it's all about. I signed on with OnlineBank and pay my bills online. It's amazing"
You: "I hope you have a firewall. And make sure you update your antivirus. You didn't give them your social security number, did you?"
HIM: "There is so much freeware out there. I'm just learning now, but there is so much to try out. Check out this new catch-the-monkey game."
You: "I hope you aren't giving out your personal information. It's not safe. Did you get the antivirus yet? You know not to open email attachments, right?"
HIM: "I may need to call you if I need some help.. you know with the technical stuff. What's you cell phone number?"
You:?
Anyhow to get back to the point(s), maybe MS should plug the holes in IE with the billions of dollars they make and keep developers in work.
To address this thread - I think this area is too GREY to have a court decide. Perhaps peole like GATOR know this.
The world is not black and white - its various shades of grey depending on which side of the
SEO/marketing/popup/adware/etc line you stand on.
Good luck LL.Bean - the lawyers will get paid but who will win?
They could shut this whole thing down with 1 update of a few lines of code
There goes your G Toolbar too. Along with the other USEFUL add-ons.
If this was any industry but the internet, the owners of gator would all be sitting in jail cells.
I compare Gator's practice to standing just inside your competitor's doorway and jumping in front of customers with a big sign saying to Shop At Joe's instead of here. How long would that last?
Until they make enough money and move on to some other unexploited area of the internet.
"We believe software should not trick you into installing it"
also
" This information should be presented in a way that a typical user will see and understand -- not buried in small print"
[google.com...]
Perhaps they did not read the fine print on googles website during the install - does anyone?
License agreement text, however, is all the same size. The license agreement explains what the software does, what the limitations are, etc.... it's all in there. How much more do you need? It's not up to the developer to "highlight" parts of the License agreement that they think you may or may not agree with just because you're too lazy to read it. That's what the license agreement ITSELF is for - for you to read the terms of use and decide whether its worth it or not.
An example I like to use is Divx. Last year a friend sent me a video clip that was encoded using Divx, but in order to get the codec I had two options: pay for it, or install the free version that came with Gator. I read the license agreement and decided I didn't want gator on my system, and wrote back to my friend and told him to send me the video in a different format because I wasn't buying the Codec and didn't want Gator on my system.
If the video had never been available in a different format, then you know what? I would have chosen not to watch it... you have to choose what's more important, having the software you want or having the software you don't want.
I'm still waiting for someone to send me a URL that will install Spyware on my computer without requiring me to click anything manually to approve it. Even Internet Explorer's DEFAULT SETTINGS will not allow this, and as I said earlier I'll PayPal $20 to anyone who can prove otherwise to me. I set up my laptop with IE6 default settings. Prove me wrong.
And again for the record, I hate Gator and popup ads in general - but I support their right to run their business the way they have been. Everything is fully disclosed - if you're too dumb to read the disclosure, then well ... you're just too dumb :)
Dummy here,
I never read the fine print - but I dont **** and moan when I suffer the consequences...
Whats this got to do with this LL.Bean thread?
These scumware peddlers are parasites and the folks who buy their ads are the reason they exist. I have a broadband networked house and every computer in the house except for mine ocasionally gets something on like this on it. I have one now that I have to decide whether to spend a couple hours finding the dll's and registry keys or just f-disking it and starting over. The thing not only has no uninstall... it randomly generates the names of the .exe's that run in the system tray. It is a total piece of work and *really* is more akin to a worm than anything else. And the point of it all... so they can sell popups to my first grader... give me a break. Nobody willingly installs this crap on their computers. They are always hidden in some crappy add-on or a fake system message etc. We all know the routines. Home users shouldn't have to be computer techs to stay safe when using the internet.
Home users shouldn't have to be computer techs to stay safe when using the internet.
Of course they should! Heh just kidding. But seriously, there is a "learning curve" to the Internet and just like everything else in life the lazy, ignorant, and stupid will ultimately suffer. There are some sneaky people out there ... it's no different than buying a car from a shady dealer or obtaining a loan from a third party finance company with variable rates.
You HAVE TO READ THE TERMS or you'll end up agreeing to something you wish you hadn't. Installing software is no different - read the terms and you won't have any problems. I run no anti-virus software and I've never had a virus, spyware, or any of that crap in 10 years (it would be EVER but once a long time I got Monkey B from a copy of Leisure Suit Larry. Heh. Serves me right for pirating it).
Anyway, I know you get the point ... you don't happen to agree with it, but unfortunately it's a fact. Pay attention to what you're doing/signing/installing and you'll have little to no problems.
You took the words right out of my mouth...
Its up to the individual to TAKE responsibility for his her own computer/actions. Yes, its not nice to have someone mess up your computer but its also not nice to pay way too much interest on a car loan from a shady dealer for some old junker.
Its also a pain to buy medical coverage only to find your illness is not covered.
My first grader can play games online, but I don't expect that he will read tos agreements.
This is another example of people wanting everyone else to think them so they don't have to think themselves. Who lets a first grader use the Internet without supervision? If you were right there next to him, like you should be, you would know if he installed software or read the terms or not.
Ignorance is no excuse.
Nonsense. AdWare is 100% pure creative genius.
So is nicotene. ;)
Although if we're talking about creative geniuses I'd be more inclined to point at Microsoft, Google, Yahoo, (insert any big business name).
AdWare is on par with spam - those effected by it hate it and those who inflict it can justify it any number of ways....*cough* we're not doing anything wrong.
The simple fact of the matter is that it capitalises of the lack of knowledge of IT general users have and is no more a viable business activity than blagging customers in a used car showroom. Yeh you may pull in some custom but it holds no long term business stability - simply because as soon as the market generates revenue, more businesses will enter and take over with ethical and accpetable (by the majortity) practices.
Playing on keywords is a seperate issue - a whole grey area born on the web. IMO, anything that intentionally capitalises on brand names is trademark infringement and should be treated as such. That said, unintentional instances of this grey the area a lot!
I appreciate and support the right to conduct business practices as you see fit (within the law obviously), but there is a line that can be crossed and capitalising on grey areas such as this hovers on the line. Like I said, it may be a legal business practice (at least right now it is), but it doesn't mean it's acceptable. And more importantly it's a quick capitalisation of an area that most likely will be heavily regulated (perhaps even illegal) in the future.
I'd be interested to know who of those who defend AdWare also have a vested financial interest in doing so because frankly that's the only reason I can see for defending it. It's intrusive and unwanted and I see no long term business benefit of having those feelings associated with any business.
Scott
Ignorance is no excuse. I hate adware/spyware/scumware call it what you will. But its all down to responsiblity.
Who said you could use the internet without problems/danger/spam? It would be much nicer if we could - but this is reality.
Adware may be a low form of marketing to some but to others its a way of making a buck - just like the shady used car dealer.
P.S. I have never used or will promote any type of adware/scumware/etc. Just in case you thought I had an axe to grind...
just do a search on google
Legislation against certain adware abuses would be a good first step, but illegality certainly hasn't stopped worms and viruses from propogating regularly. I really think there will only be impetus for change when the Russian mafia put a back door into a piece of spyware that allows them to flip a switch and steal hundreds of thousands of credit card numbers at a clip. Not to mention bank account numbers, social security numbers, and an array of personal information limited only by the imagination.
Sure, it can be argued that you install these pests "willingly" the first time... but you NEVER agree to have the program re-installed again after you have uninstall it. <emphasis here>It installs itself on your computer again without your consent. </e>
This is unethical and illegal. Sure, the suit hasn't been filed yet, but when they re-install the software without permission they cross the line.
And this is where they will get nailed. The first download is consensual (albeit deceptive). But even when you agree to the initial install you never give them permission to re-install the program repeatedly after you have uninstalled it.
The very argument that some of you are using to defend scumware (that it's consensual) is the very point that will ultimately lead to the demise of such programs. You've got to be very careful when making an argument that you don't back yourself into a corner.
digitaltv and others - I would love to hear a defense for the repeated uninvited re-installs... certainly, you can't argue that this is consensual.
If you let that salesman into your house once and then ask him to leave... his invitation has expired. He does not have license or permission to break into your house any time he wishes. Once he steps foot in your door again he's trespassing and violating the law. Sure, you did let him in once, but you didn't give him an eternal invite to enter your home and pester you.
Televisions are starting to do it. Dvd players are starting to do it. Digital recorders are starting to do it. They can put ads on the TV on top of whatever you might be watching.
What about road signs? In the UK around london, they are almost nonexistent. Yet you go to parts of the US and it is hard to see the road for the billboards.
It's a model that will untimately fail.
Been to a movie lately? We went and saw Shrek last night (great movie! even for adults) and there was 20 minutes of commercials before the show. These were pure commercials - not trailers.
Ever wonder why browser manufacturers allowed you to change your start page? That will change in about 20 months with the next os.
>Google is aware of this problem at least.
Ya, they exploit it daily with every install of the Google Toolbar. Which as an advertiser, they should be be slammed for messing with their competitors advertisements. Blocking popups looks a bit like an anti-trust issue to me.
>We believe software should not trick you into installing it
No, you should read a 30 page incomprehensible legal document and have to click OK to install the Google toolbar? Ya, right!
> LL has a point in that the ads
That the ads violate it's copyright and walks on it's brand. Which it appears too.
That is the same issue dogging Google AdWords.
>You HAVE TO READ THE TERMS
I agree with the sentiment, but when the terms are incomprehensible to an average person, then they are nonapplicable. It is true that ignorance of the law is no defense, but one should not have to have an attorney with them while surfing the internet.
> AdWare is on par with spam
It is onpar with product inserts in the movies. You didn't ask that StarBucks be advertised in Shrek, but you did agree to it when you purchased a ticket.
>Legislation against certain adware abuses would be a good first step,
Ya, we lost that round when MS got off the antitrust trial too easily.
The solution is simple. You gotta ask yourself one question, why hasn't microsoft fixed it?
Starting Internet Explorer:
- Warning! Third party hooks detected.
- Warning! Third party programs can contain advertising programs and/or carry viruses.o Allow Yahoo Toolbar to execute?
oo click this box to call this item always secure.o Allow Super Adware popup programs to execute?
oo click this box to call this item always secure.o Allow Google Toolbar to execute?
oo click this box to call this item always secure.o Don't show this box again.
note: these options are always available on the internet explorer configuration screen.
This is not a problem with terms of service, Adware programs, or the legal and ethical aspects of advertising - this is a problem created and endorsed by nonaction by Microsoft.
This thread is about copyright - not scumware or spyware.
Exactly. My husband downloaded some crap that keeps reinstalling itself within 2 hours of me removing it. I've spent almost a day trying to get it completely removed. Every time I do, it comes back two hours later. I am ready to throw the computer out the window.
It is onpar with product inserts in the movies. You didn't ask that StarBucks be advertised in Shrek, but you did agree to it when you purchased a ticket.
And the movie producer worked out that arrangement with Starbucks, not the theater owner. I'm sure that the producer would have a few things to say if they saw their carefully placed Starbucks coffee cups replaced with cans of Hamm's beer.
It is onpar with product inserts in the movies. You didn't ask that StarBucks be advertised in Shrek, but you did agree to it when you purchased a ticket.
Do you think Starbucks would be happy if their advert was replaced by one for Coffee Republic?
