Real Networks And More Privacy Concerns

Arrogant-Bastard writes: "Lauren Weinstein's Privacy Forum Digest V09 #15 reports that RealNetworks' "Download Demon" forwards the details of any download (i.e. URLs, filenames) to RealNetworks. See The Digest for details. " Now, granted, this time the program, if you read the fine print, says that it will do this - but c'mon people - how many bone-headed moves do you have to make?

Comments

Big Brother? Who's He?

[aliastnb]

We live in a digital age. It is becoming ridiculously easy to track people wherever they may go, in real life, or on the Net. I have a very different opinion to that of most people I have spoken to- namely that I accept that in all probability people are watching me to some extent,and accept it without qualm.

For example, my bank would be able to tell me that at the start of this month, I went away for a weekend to London by car, while I was there I travelled mainly by Tube, I visited Kingston and Wimbledon, and that I probably stayed with a friend. That's quite a lot of information to be derived from a few transactions on my debit card- but it's perfectly possible to infer this from just a small amount of information.

My cellphone company could tell me I have family in Scarborough despite the fact they've not got their address.

... and so on. Fact is, it's very very easy to track someone through their real life. As far as I understand it, why should life on the Net be any different? I accept that anonymity is nigh-on impossible in real life, so why should I expect more on-line? Cookies can be used to track where users go on the net, and indeed are. Why should I care? I accept the fact that I have no / very little privacy and live with it.

This may seem very scary to some of you, but why? Unless you've got something to hide, why do you need your privacy? I don't think you do. I know I certainly don't.

--

Re:Big Brother? Who's He?

[drooling-dog]

Well, here's something to consider: How long before these records start getting subpoenaed by law enforcement agencies? Suppose that in a few years the government is run by the "religious right", and it dawns on these people that there's a "one-stop shopping" kind of place to get a list of everyone who's been downloading sexually-oriented material or other files of questionable moral or political virtue. I don't like being targeted by people selling things, but I'm far more concerned that once these databases exist they can be used for purposes (and by people) that we can't yet forsee...

Re:Big Brother? Who's He?

[Poor Soul]

I dislike TV advertising because it breaks up the flow of whatever I'm watching, wastes my time, and is generally quite irritating in itself.

In case you don't know, that advertising is what enables you to watch your show. Without advertising dollars, the cost of such simple things such as newspapers, TV and magazines would be astronomical. Putting up with 4 minutes of comercials is the price you pay for cheap entertainment.





In the words of Homer Simpson... "Mmmmm... beer."

Re:Big Brother? Who's He?

[bendude]

Oh, God!
Did anyone else see that thing on a police state being created slowly so the subjects wouldn't have any experience to relate it to?
I am almost daily seeing a chance to link to it.

Re:Big Brother? Who's He?

[SquadBoy]

This is the attitude that allows things like this to happen. "Unless you've got something to hide, why do you need your privacy?" Simply put because I do not want everyone to know everything about me and because it is very easy to abuse this kind of info. This attitude also is based on the thought that the government is looking out for you and that real networks is always thinking about my welfare. Simple information is power the more info you have about me the more power you have over me and I just don't trust the government or a company that collects info in a very backdoor fashion that much. You point out that if the bank took the time to look they could figure out what you buy and where and draw some conclusions about that. I don't know about you but my bank has a policy that says that they will not. Simply put because something could be done does not mean that it should be. The other diff between the credit card/cellphone/telco example and this is that if you think about it for about half a minute it becomes clear that they can know this info it is part and parcel with the service obvious stuff. With this "download demon" it is not at all obvious and there is no reason that it has to be this way unlike your examples. So you say you don't need your privacy then put up a post with your real name, cellphone number, address and ip address if you are lucky enough to have a static.

Re:Big Brother? Who's He?

[Rift]

The difference between tracking on the net, and tracking in real life is the ease of tracking hundreds of thousands at once, automatically. If I wanted to track you in real life, it'd be tough to also track all of the people on your block at the same time. Not so with net traffic. In fact, after initial setup, a place like doubleclick can gather much more usefull (to marketers) infomation much more quickly about hundreds of thousands of people than I can about you following you in real life.

As for needing my privacy; Do I care if someone knows I like nifty electronics? No. Do I care if I get unsolicited calls, emails, and letters selling such? Yes. I hate email spam. I hate telemarketers. The only thing worse is being target-marketed by a group of them that think I'm a hot prospect because of some damn data collected by an internet company.

Re:Big Brother? Who's He?

[Kryptonomic]

What's this thing I've heard about having to remove the battery from a GSM phone to completely silence it? Switching it off isn't enough? What is it sending/receiving even after being switched off?

Re:Big Brother? Who's He?

[Tim C]

Unless you've got something to hide, why do you need your privacy?

I like my privacy. I have nothing to hide, but I still like to know that what I do, where I go, etc, is my business, and no-one else's.

Why, if I have nothing to hide?

Well, it depends on your definition of what you need, or want, to hide. Me, I want to hide my spending patterns, how much I earn, what sort of things I like (hobbies, favourite music, even favourite TV shows and foods, etc). Why?

Because I'm fast becoming tired of all the advertising.

(And that's without addressing any other concerns; I'll leave that for now, as I really ought to be working)

It's getting so that you can't make a move in the on- or off-line worlds without being bombarded by the stuff. Giving more information about what I'm likely to spend my money on to the people that try to get me to spend it is only going to increase the amount of advertising that is thrown at me.

I dislike online advertising because it costs me time and money to download the stuff (until I add it to my junkbuster block file), and clutters up web pages (that's an aesthetic objection :-) ).

I dislike real-world spam mail because it's a waste of resources, and just helps add to the mountains of rubbish we have to deal with.

I dislike TV advertising because it breaks up the flow of whatever I'm watching, wastes my time, and is generally quite irritating in itself.

You seem to have accepted the slow erosion of your privacy; that is your right. I do not, as is my right, and I will fight to keep what little privacy I still have.

Cheers,

Tim

Re:Big Brother? Who's He?

[Todd Knarr]

Well, I would guess you have nothing to hide in your personal life and finances. So, perhaps we should arrange for the details of your checking account, including who you wrote which checks to and for how much, and the contents of all the letters you wrote to your friends and family, including those love notes to your wife ( if you are in fact married, substitute appropriately if not ). And that little rant to your friend about what you really think of your boss at work. No? This doesn't appeal to you? Why not? After all, why do you need your privacy if you don't have anything to hide?

Re:Big Brother? Who's He?

[MountainSky]

Privacy has practical value. In negotiations of all sorts, it's normally prudent to make information available carefully -- selectively you might say. If I'm selling a house, it's not in my best interest for potential buyers to have a lot of information about my financial situation. In poker, you don't show your cards. In buying and selling, you keep certain things to yourself. I share the view that it's impossible to maintain complete privacy, and that it's very easy for people to find out all kinds of things about me, but I'm not prepared to accept that privacy doesn't matter and that I shouldn't care about it. There are many things that are just nobody else's business, and the reason they are nobody else's business is also nobody else's business. Regards, Peter Barry www.[my sig].com

Re:Big Brother? Who's He?

[CaptainZapp]

"My cellphone company could tell me I have family in Scarborough"

It's actually a lot worse then that:

Provided that you have your phone switched on, your provider can actually map the physical location of the phone within a couple of miles.

GSM phones are always connected to a physical cell. When the cell changes this data is (must be) recorded by the system.

A paper investigated what's happening with this data and caught our local crap carrier storing it for six month. They argued that this is required for the billing (ho!ho!)

Scary ? Maybe. It doesn't make me stick my phone under the next plane to Albania, though...

"despite the fact they've not got their address. "

A reverse directory lookup shouldn't really be that hard for a phone company.

Re:Big Brother? Who's He?

[aliastnb]

> within a couple of miles.

Less, actually, triangulation can get it down to less. Of course, this means the cells have to overlap. They do of course- what happens if a n antenna has to go offline for a short while?

> A reverse directory lookup shouldn't really be that hard for a phone company.

I've never called them using my cellphone. Perhaps I shouldn't heve neglected to mention this. All can be derived simply by 'pinging' the phone (as the network does every 90 minutes).

Re:Download Demon, NOT RealPlayer

[j_d]

that's true, but the digest has this little nugget:

You may already have stumbled across this little surprise on your system.
I found it apparently bundled in with other downloads I had made from
RealNetworks.

What 'other downloads' does this include? I'm tired of hearing about how Real 'respects my privacy' but still does stuff like this. The privacy group they belong to shouuld revoke their membership and shoot them.
At this point, I'm gonna flush real altogether and go pick up the real plugin from winamp.

Re:DoubleClick!

[ripicheep]

it has become clear that the terms of the license agreement should be compared in the same way as price when making an informed buying decision.


Great insight!

Many programs are available for download for free (as in free beer), but there is still a cost. People are not charging money for the product, but that does not mean that they are not making a profit from your use of the product.

Free email accounts on the web, free dialup accounts, free streaming media software... You don't pay any money for these products and services, but what do you give up in exchange?
Often you are asked for information such as an email address, and other contact information. If they are particularaly cheeky they might ask you for your age and education/occupation and annual salary.

The software might be free, but if the EULA includes a statemant like Each use of our product constitutes agreement to pay a $1 fee billed to you through your ISP after stripping your IP. coupled with the now standard statement at the end Any part of this EULA may be changed without notice then there is a cost, but it is in a place where we traditionally do not look for a cost.

The price or cost of using a piece of software is agreeing to the terms and conditions of the EULA. We are used to the others not knowing what is happening on our computers. However, with dedicated connections to the internet and software that reports back to the owner about what is happening on your computer, we are no longer able to disregard the EULA with by thinking "what they don't know won't hurt me".

Several others have made the comparisson to a trojan horse. What I am waiting to see is what will be the first piece of software to report back to it's owner about other software on your computer. When will a program relate all of your keystrokes back to the owner while the program is running? All the software on our computer? The contents of the files?

Many people (probably not on /.) would be more than happy to know that someone else was running their computer as long as it continued to work. Many of us here on /. are the people that keep those computers running for our co-workers, friends and families. To have a company monitoring and fixing their computers over the internet would be a godsend for many people who encounter problems that they can't solve. But when does a product feature built in to help us cross the line and become an invasion of privacy?

Is it ok (legaly or ethically) for software to do anything it wants to simply because you agreed to let it in some obscutre clause of non-standard licensing agreement?

For now I don't see any solution other than to read the EULA very carefully before using the software. As LaNMaN2000 said in the above post, the EULA thould be looked at like a price tag. Know all of the hidden costs of a product before you agree to use it, as enforcement of these terms is becoming easier and easier for the owners.

And as one last piece of advice for those creating software that they want people to use: Use of a standardized EULA will greatly increase the ease and comfort of agreeing to your license. When I see that the EULA says GPL, I know in three letters what that license entails. Create a license that is basic enough that you can use it on all of your products with minimal additions. (doesn't have to be the GPL, but stick to a standard) If I see that the EULA for a piece of "ripicheep Corp" software is their standard license with the addition of the following terms, then once I know what that standard license is, I don't have to search through the fine print to determine if I am willing to agree to the EULA.

Re:ZoneAlarm caught them

[Cy Guy]

A couple of Points:

- I too am a big fan of ZoneAlarm and recommend it to any home users with a 24/7 connection.

- Have you noticed that ZA often warns of traffic on weird ports when you visit SlashDot?

- I really wish ZA would have a better log and better help related to what to do if you are being scanned/pinged/etc.

- Does anyone know if this Netzip Download Demon will still download files if you set ZA to disallow it from acting as a server, but still let it access the Internet as a client. (One of the better features of ZA is the ability to allow programs to run as clients OR servers OR both)

Re:Alternatives?

[kwangell]

I'm sure it was just a slip on your part, but how does Windows figure into this picture. Is there some magical operating system you know of that will prevent programs from making socket connections you don't already know about? Yes, I guess you would say, a firewall, but in this case it was the firewall sending the message, what OS would have prevented this?

I'm sure the programmers over at Real Networks told their bosses about the backlash they would shortly be receiving if they went ahead with this feature. They did anyway, I'm sure they will offer some bizzaro explanation for the "feature" and take it out once they have been Slashdotted. But this isn't a Windows issue and neither was your firewall.

New Product

[LaNMaN2000]

I plan to release a new free product that will be easily obtained over the Internet. For the sake of discussion, I have included relevant portions of the EULA that are (of course) tucked away in pages of legalese.

1) By using this software, you give EvilCorp permission to send a copy of this software to all of your Outlook Express contacts.

2) By allowing EvilCorp to distribute its software in the aforementioned manner, you are indicating your willingness to be responsible for all incidental costs (including bandwidth/storage/etc.) that result from this distribution.

3) Any damage caused to files on your computer as a result of using our software is not the responsibility of EvilCorp.

4) ILOVEYOU!

What do you think?

WWLD

[flybait]

Now remember children, before you go off half-cocked, take a deep breath and ask yourself: "What Would Lars Do?" Feel Better? I thought so.

And Thank You

It's Worse Than That

[knuth]

Seth Finkelstein winds up by asking how many people will read through the mountains of fine print.

If I understand the article correctly, Download Demon is bundled with some other Real programs and sets itself up automatically. So some people did not ask for the Download Demon, might not even know it's on their system, and so would never have thought to read its Privacy Statement.

Re:Arrghhh!

[Allicorn]

In the distant future, when Trek-a-like transporter technology is commonplace, companies will modify your DNA while you're in-transit so that you *do* have a colorful pigmented banner-ad on your forehead, with content targetted to the demographic of the average citizen in the area you transported to. ;)

Now this takes the cake..

[cyphergirl]

I can understand Real collecting information about users of a piece of FREE software.. heck, there's a price for everything these days. The problem that I have is that the hide this information in the "fine print" of their EULA, instead of displaying it promenantly in the install program. They should have a screen that comes up that says:

WARNING: By installing this software, Real reserves the right to record your name, address, kids social security numbers, and what you had for dinner last night by giving you this free software. If you don't want us to know that you beat your wife, please cancel this installation right now!

--cyphergirl

Re:Now this takes the cake..

[suss]

WARNING: By installing this software, Real reserves the right to record your name, address, kids social security numbers, and what you had for dinner last night

They can see what i've had for dinner... right after i've put my finger down my throat and throw up all over their friggin software. I've given up on realplayer anyway, can't get it to run without crashing.

Annoying...

[kinkie]

I downloaded RealPlayer 7 today. It is annoying indeed, because I also got (unwanted) Real Jukebox and Download Daemon, and (almost unwanted) Net2Phone. The bad part is that the installer doesn't ask whether I wish to install those, nor it asks the installation paths and other stuff. Besides, the installer _IS_ bugged, as it doesn't take into account nationalized versions of Wind-Blows which change the "My Documents" directory name.
Spent 15 minutes to disable all that stuff, all reporting back to real networks, special offers and everything.
Not a real incentive to installing the software.. but then again, normal "luzers" won't care about that stuff and will be happily spammed.

Still, I'm a bit pissed off at this attitude. It's almost as bad as our favourite pun-target, with their "oh, and if you buy our word processor, we'll also slip under your nose a few (sometimes not-entirely-compatible) fixes to your OS".

Re:Annoying...

[latro]

You can still get the super basic model - but it's not easy. Just be very careful when you're picking the options you want (I think there are 3 places on the website where you can go astray).

Also - during the install, de-select all of the "helpful" things real player wants to add and put bogus info wherever you can. Oh, and of course you have to de-select a bunch of things in the options once you run it (systray!), but when it's all done you can have a nice, minimized player that plays low-quality music! Sweet.

If only those radio stations *COUGH*WFNX*COUGH* wouldn't insist on using real for their online broadcasts.

-------

Re:Annoying...

[kinkie]

From what I understand, the S{t,m}art Center basically is a RealPlayer that stays resident (eating up RAM), so that when you open a RM clip it doesn't have to be loaded from disk, resulting in a (2 to 3 seconds) faster startup.
All in all, a worthless piece of junk.

Re:Annoying...

[Spatch]

I downloaded RealPlayer 7 today. It is annoying indeed, because I also got (unwanted) Real Jukebox and Download Daemon, and (almost unwanted) Net2Phone. The bad part is that the installer doesn't ask whether I wish to install those, nor it asks the installation paths and other stuff.

I remember being able to specify all I wanted was the RealPlayer 7 for Windows and none of the other extraenous features, but ISTR this step happening during the persual of Real's web pages and if I'd blinked, I'd have missed the step that allowed me to choose. Then again, when the link to the FREE DOWNLOAD of RealPlayer from Real's main page takes you to an ad for the $29.95 version first -- and oh maybe there'll be a link to the 'basic player' -- so I'm fully convinced Real does not want to cater to those lusers who may, horror of horrors, prefer to actively have a say in a product download process.

Even the stripped-down FREE DOWNLOAD RealPlayer7 gave me problems. The installation added bookmarks to my collection (I thought bookmarks were URLs I personally wanted to keep handy for future reference, not some idiot program installer) and attempted to change my browser's start page, too -- just like ICQ did, all without asking if I wouldn't really rather want some crappy corporate portal as my start page.

And then there's the "StartCenter". Or SmartCenter. Or whatever the hell it is. Not content with having an icon smashed in your Start Menu and one in the QuickStart row for Win98, RealPlayer7 also wants to shove one up yer system tray as well. I have found no useful function of this S[t|m]artCenter other than the fact that it sits silent and ominous, taking up screenspace and a bit of memory, as I do other Windowsly things. And removing it seems to be more of a difficult task than it should be -- and, again, I don't remember agreeing to have it start up every reboot. Sure, you can kill it once it's started, but that's a needless step.

And what does it do?! I have found absolutely nobody who's able to tell me exactly why my life is enriched by having this sit, resident-like, in my system tray. If I want to start a saved RealAudio or RealVideo clip, I open it as I would any other file. If I choose a URL containing streaming Real content, the browser opens the app for me. There is almost never a time where I consciously head over to the system tray to actively start an application, volume control panels and the like notwithstanding.

The paranoid in me sez S[m|t]artCenter is providing information of some sort to RealNetworks. It would not surprise me in the least if that's what this little thing is doing. RealNetworks has clearly displayed no real respect for its users or their privacy or even their own wishes on how their own computer should be set up as far as personal preferences like bookmarks and browser start pages go. What's one more infraction among friends?

It's a question of ethics

[igaborf]

Why shouldn't Real know the names of the people using their service? After all they are the ones allowing you to use their software for free ... if you don't read the small print then it's your own fault if you get upset about this.

My feeling is that if your product is going to act in ways that you know are distasteful to many potential users you are ethically obligated to point that out in a clear and obvious manner. Saying it in the small-print legalese may satisfy legal requirements but doesn't satisfy ethical ones, IMHO.

And as I understand it, the product in question is installed in the process of installing other products, so the user may not even know that there is a potential issue to consider. That puts using a nonobvious warning even further outside the pale, ethically speaking.

Re:Download Demon, NOT RealPlayer

[Kaa]

What would you rather have, Windows Media Player?

Well, since you've asked, yes.

(1) WMP works better than the RealPlayer -- it crashes less often (note: "less often", not "rarely") and AFAIK supports more formats. Besides, I don't really watch anything in RealAudio/Video anyway.

(2) RealNetworks has a very consistent pattern of trying to spy on its users -- much more so than Microsoft.

(3) Given a choice between dealing with a big lumbering dinosaur (e.g. stegosaurus) and a smaller more aggressive one (e.g. velociraptor), I'll take the big one any time.

Kaa

More pabulum to them

[swinge]

The rights that you so glibly take for granted were gradually wrested from various despotic governments over the past few centuries. Even quite recently, people faced firehoses, dogs, tear gas and bullets while fighting against various government agencies that used secretly gathered files of personal information. There have been a number of privacy violating scandals in the current White House, implicating the President and the First Lady. Where have you been? What if the fineprint in the Slashdot privacy policy said that nitwits who endlessly repeat laissez-faire libertarian arguments can be shot: you agreed to it... can we shoot you?

And without the Big Brother spectre that operates against anyone caught up in political struggles, the very practical reason we need to keep worrying about it today is that this data is being gathered for all time. When I need to buy a new car, I don't want the salesman to have access to piles of information about me and my tastes because that information can be used to extract a higher price from me. A fundamental assumption of free-market economic theory is that both parties to a transaction have equal information. If one side has been spying, the benefits of free-market trading are lost.

Re:Download Demon, NOT RealPlayer

[SloWave]

Unless you are carefull installing the latest Realplayer you will get the Netzip with it's download demon by default. I'm getting ready to block Realnetwork's IP's at the firewall. It is time for reverse engineering of realplayers format. Screw DMCA and all the bought politicians.

Re:What are their motives?

[silicon_synapse]

Perhaps they plan to use this information to gauge software piracy. They could sell data to corporations to see where/how often files identical to theirs are being downloaded. I doubt any legal action could be brought against anyone downloading a file that appears to be illegal, but the info could be usefull to companies. Real could make a fortune doing that. I hope I'm wrong though.


How am I supposed to hallucinate with all these swirling colors distracting me?

fine print...

[ikeda]

what's with fine print ? they want to do something they know u don't want em to do.. yet they want to be able to say u agreed to let em do it..

ugh...

why don't they publicize that fact as one of the "features" of real player..

Re:easy solution:

[wfreds]

Nonsense. GoZilla includes Aureate's spy ware, which not only collects information without telling you, it slows or crashes browsers and e-mail clients. It's just as bad as Download Demon, if not worse.

Alternatives?

[dsplat]

Does anyone have a page listing alternative (preferably free) software to play the formats that Real Player supports?

Re:Alternatives?

[latro]

the only problem with that winamp plugin is that you have to install Real Player for it to work!!!

Besides that, Winamp with the plugin has a hard time with the streaming Real Player content - I finally broke down and removed it and just used Real for those audio streams that don't come in mp3.

-------

Re:Alternatives?

[Anonymous Coward]

Sorry, but no.

I think however that you might find that similiar situations are going to become "industry standard".

As a point in case, I recently installed a "personalized firewall" product on a friends machine. As a confirmed paranoid, I had a packet sniffer running at the time and guess what?

Suprise, suprise, it fired of a packet to it's creators to let them know that it had been installed at that IP address. My advice to my friend was simple - get ride of it.

The moral of my tale is obvious. If your stuck using Windoze in certain situations, get yourself a packet sniffer first and worry about your multi-media ( and other utilities ) later.

This kind of idiocy is becoming so pervasive it's gone beyond a joke. The only reason why it even gets of the ground is simply because the general public doesn't know. If they did, they wouldn't touch these products and companies would very quickly learn to leave the issue alone.

You might be strangling my chicken, but you don't want to know what I'm doing to your hampster.

Re:Alternatives?

[Analysis Paralysis]

As far as firewalls go, you could do worse than try AtGuard. Privacy should be less of an issue since WRQ (rhe creators) have given up on it and sold it to Symantec. An original copy would still send info (if it did at all) off to WRQ...

Re:Alternatives?

[Anonymous Coward]

Close, but no cigar. Whilst getting rid of the nasty spyware personalised firewall (care to name it ?) was a good idea, a better idea would have been to knock up a script to send a message telling them that their software was installed on 'rand(255).rand(255).rand(255).rand(255)' and just leave that running ;-).

Re:Alternatives?

[Cyberllama]

Streambox VCR from www.streambox.com is a viable alternative, but unfurtunately, thanks to a court order from your friends and mine at Real Networks, they have been prohibitted from disrtibuting it during the lawsuit. Real's problem with the program is that not only does it allow for viewing real files, but it also alows for the recording of files that are streamed through it. IF anyone knows of anything like this not under gag order by Real, I'd love to see it. :)

Re:Alternatives?

[j_d]

It's windows only, but...
Winamp plug in

Re:Alternatives?

[sid_vicious]

A program which has reverse-engineered the Real Player format?!

*Tsk!* *Tsk!*

That reeks of a DMCA violation! :)

This is typical

[BaptistDeathRay]

Internet companies are realizing that ad banners don't work, so they're trying to collect information that will collect as much information as they can about people for targeted advertising. Consumer privacy be damned.
+----------------------------------------------- -------

what about the Online Privacy Alliance?

[lastNICKonEARTH]

Real is obviously not getting a clue so what about sending feedback to the Online Privacy Alliance that they are so proudly associated with? I checked them out and they seem to be an inflated multi-committee PR move to self police privacy issues but if they start to get gripes about a member maybe they can do something. Interestingly they have no obvious e-mail contacts but after digging I found that you can e-mail Christine about OPA questions at the webmaster address (webmaster@privacyalliance.org)

"Christine,
I am a little unclear about the function of your alliance. It sounds like you have created a self regulating body that can do whatever it wants with personal information as long as it is somehow disclosed in the privacy policy. My concern is the situation with Real Networks. They are still farming user information in what I consider to be rather insidious. They had problems with their Real Jukebox product and apparently fixed it but now their appropriately named "demon" program sends information (file names and URLs) of any program I download to realnetworks/netzip. This is unacceptable. I don't care if this is being used anonymously for marketing or if they are creating a personal profile to figure out how my children are going to look. I don't like it! As a member of your alliance you are responsible for their actions because they are touting membership to comfort concerned consumers (ME). It's not helping and is only serving to make me question the validity of your organization. I hope you are able to do something about this issue.

Sincerely

ANONYMOUS

P.S. You would think that an organization with "seek input and support for Alliance initiatives from consumer, business, academic, advocacy and other organizations that share its commitment to privacy protection." in it's mission statement would consider having a couple of e-mail contacts on the site."

Dop Christine a line: webmaster@privacyalliance.org

Re:Online Privacy Policies

[Anonymous Coward]

How you feel about your privacy depends largely on how much control you have over guarding it. People who shop at a store are not generally averse to the store knowing their preferences. On the other hand, people who browse Web sites that are not shopping sites, or people who browse without buying, are not accustomed to having their identity recorded for a future use they can neither know nor control. No shop I am aware of in the physical world copies my passport and driver's license before allowing me to enter.

If your members persist in hiding and publicly denying the invasiveness of their Internet tracking measures, they deserve to be shut down by the heavy hand of government. Today they abuse the trust of the public with breathtaking arrogance.

What about the new Yahoo Media Player?

[cpeterso]

I recently download the new Yahoo! Player Beta. It's free (beer), looks nice, uses CDDB and skins, and hasn't crashed for me yet. Does anyone know if the Yahoo Player is a "real app" or is it just a skin for the WMP or RealPlayer??

Re:Windows Media Player 7.0 doesn't...

[Scutter]

It's also still in beta and currently buggy as hell.

Re:It really should be illegal...

[seichert]

When are people going to get it? Always looking to the law to solve your problems. What are you going to do when the law can't reach these people(like when they operate in a foreign country)? Instead you need to be more aware of how to protect yourself and read privacy warnings like this. Use technology and the internet to solve this problem. Why don't you write a script that parses through a privacy policy looking for key words like "URL, IP, log",etc.

On a side note such scripts would be useful for congressional bills as well.
Stuart Eichert

RealNetworks

[Kaa]

I am really, really tired of RealNetworks trying to spy on its users. This is not the first time and clearly they are going to do whatever they can get away with.

I think I'll now classify RealNetworks as a "don't let a packet come withing three hops of them" company. I am fairly sure I don't have anything of theirs installed, but I'll check just in case.

Kaa

Once a spammer, always a spammer...

[seebs]

Come on, folks, did anyone *really* expect a company that once proudly proclaimed that they were sending email to 53,000,000 people in every run to suddenly get a clue?

RBL listings, plural, did not get these people to fix their problems.

My response? I donated a computer to http://www.free-expression.org/, and got my employer to donate them a license for another OS they might be able to target. :)

Give it a look, and if it seems interesting, get involved. If we replace RealAudio, RealNetworks will die quietly, which is pretty much the best they deserve.

I remember when....

[Spudley]

It wasn't that long ago that Real was a company that would have been supported in places like /. They were a small company fighting to stop Microsoft from taking over the straming media market.

But now they seem to be playing the same game as other grown-up corporates. It's a shame, but I guess this is what happens when a young company grows up. Here's hoping the same never happens to Andover or Slashdot!

Re:I remember when....

[kbooth11]

Unfortunately Rob Glaser cut his teeth at Microsoft. Fortunately, Real Networks will be taken over once it is obvious that M$ has won again. If we are lucky it will be aol, (keep the herd in one place). (8?>

This is stupid But its just gonna backfire

[SirStanley]

Yes this is invasion of Privacy. Yes by using the product you agree to them doing this. And YES, 99% of their database is gonna be filled with
IP# FILENAME CONNECTION DATE
x.x.x.x GROUPSEX.JPG 56k SomeDate
How useful is that?

What Else to Use to Play RealMedia??

[Rahoule]

I'd love to. But what else can play RealAudio/RealVideo files? Are there any other good players out there for Linux or Windows that can play RealAudio or RealVideo?

RealPlayer keeps bugging me to "register" it. Lately, it's been asking me to download (from within RealPlayer) an "update" for the player, as well. If I do that, it's sure to give away some personal information, like the names of files I've been playing in it, my email address, and other stuff (if it hasn't already...).

Re:What Else to Use to Play RealMedia??

[sqlrob]

So Register the software. Nice, simple to do.

Just remember,
your address is me@privacy.net or postmaster@real.com or black@prognet.com (technical contact for Real.com) or accounts-payable@prognet.com (billing contact for real.com)

Re:What Else to Use to Play RealMedia??

[lpopman]

Although the story is about NetZip, I have a feeling that Realplayer tracks you as well.

Basically I visited one or two pr0n sites (yeah I know, I was bored :) and now the player is offering me swimsuit videos if I upgrage. Is it a coincidence? I might just run a packet sniffer and see...

Re:What Else to Use to Play RealMedia??

[j4im]

Ooh, I hate the RealPlayer registration thingy. It pops up and asks you to register, and in order to decline, you actually have to click a button that says "Exit", as if you're going to have to quit the application entirely. Then, to make it worse, a little dialog box comes up and says "Are you sure? Your configuration isn't complete!", or something to that effect. How disingenuous of them.

Jim

Re:What Else to Use to Play RealMedia??

[Tackhead]

> RealPlayer keeps bugging me to "register" it. Lately, it's been asking me to
> download (from within RealPlayer) an "update" for the player, as well.

Which update is that? I got two of these for my 'doze RealG2 install. The first was a few hundred K long, and without it, some of my downloaded South Park episodes wouldn't play (hey, I was away from cable for a few months, I downloaded 'em in the name of interoperability :-).

ObHack1:

On a whim, I took a checksum of every file on my Winblows machine, did the update, redid the checksum, and diffed the output. GNU utilz make DOS useful.

The "update" is merely the replacement/addition of a couple of .DLL files for the G2 codec. I backed up the .DLLs, restored the disk image and replicated the "upgrade" by simply unzipping the .DLLs into the proper directory. Which meant that only one Win9x install had to phone home to Real. The rest were done offline. Sweet.

RealG2 is now whining at me to get an update that's about 3.1M in length. Since all of my .RM files play just fine without it, I'm repeatedly telling it to fsck off. Why fix what ain't broke?

Request:

What I'd really like to see is a registry hack to permanently disable (or set the "30 days" limit to "30 years") the nag.

Thoughts:

The problem with .RM is the problem with .AVI and M$Word's .DOC. One file extension, multiple incompatible formats. Since they're traditionally generated with closed-source software, all Real has to do is disable the ability to generate "old-sk00l" .RM files in their encoder; content providers will subsequently generate data that can only be played back with "new-sk00l" players. Everyone's forced to upgrade in order to view content, and Real gets to install whatever trojans it wants. (At least most of the progress in .AVI codecs was made before the invention of spyware.)

The general rule of thumb I use is still never to upgrade any component of a Windoze system unless something is both (a) not working, and (b) there's reason to believe the upgrade will fix it.

Meanwhile, I'm also glad that MP3 is basically as good as it ever needs to be. For Windoze users - there will never be any reason to download "AOL-amp 9.99" that plays MP3s with embedded banner ads, and/or supports user profiling.

ObHack2:

Speaking of profiling, someone pointed me to a WindozeMedia video file (.ASF?) that, after it had played, spawned a browser and attempted to connect to the 'net and view a URL. Every time it was viewed -- even if you'd saved it to your local drive and were playing it locally. The URL was in ASCII embedded within the file. A few minutes with a hex editor solved that problem.

All of which is a long way of saying "me too". A cross-platform open-sourced solution for streaming and locally-stored video content would go a *long* way towards eliminating these kinds of abuses.

Re:Windows Media Player 7.0 doesn't...

[SquadBoy]

Also the point should be made that the "download demon" is a winders product and does not ship with the *nix version of realplayer. That having been said the violations are wrong and might be enough to make one not use the *nix version because of that

Re:Netzip privacy statement is *long* reading

[Staciebeth]

No one (or hardly anyone) is going to read that far down, which is why they buried it so deeply. They want the information they are collecting. Sure, "privacy nuts" will read the whole thing, but that isn't most people. If they really wanted to warn people about thier little game the gem you mentioned would be right at the top.

An answer

[gnarphlager]

but c'mon people - how many bone-headed moves do you have to make?

Exactly one. You know, this community seems a little lax on actual integrity for being so chock full of zealots. That's fine if you don't really follow the party line; respectable even, but I see so many people who don't practice what they preach. I suppose that's fair, as that there are so many different agendas here (I like free software, but I'm not of the RMS be-all-end-all persuasion).

But what really gets me is how short most people's attention span is. DVD's are evil! Lucasfilm is evil because they won't release Star Wars on DVD! Double fricking standards here. Half the people I know who bought DeCSS t-shirts also went out and bought new DVDs the same day. Now, I can't be the only person here who honestly believes in some of this crap. I know there's more out there.

My point? Real Networks fucked up a LONG time ago. I haven't touched one of their products since, and I don't plan on it. So they're at it again, I'm not surprised in the least. Yeah, they "fixed" the problem the first time around, but the whole point of a general boycott is to protect the people who are too stupid to protect themselves. If they start making this known from the get-go, (ie, the first thing you see during the install, and you can opt out) then the problem will be gone. There shouldn't be any need for ANOTHER boycott of Real . . . anyone who felt strongly about it the first time should STILL be boycotting.

Just my opinion though.

Re:An answer

[Cheshire Cat]

DVD's are evil! Lucasfilm is evil because they won't release Star Wars on DVD! Double fricking standards here. Half the people I know who bought DeCSS t-shirts also went out and bought new DVDs the same day.

Well now...lets assume that *everyone* on Slashdot boycotted DVDs to support DeCSS. Do you think that would make a difference? Would the DeCSS lawsuits be dropped? Of course not! The entire membership of Slashdot would be a mere drop in the ocean compared to the amount of people buying DVDs.

Since boycotting DVDs won't change anything, why suffer needlessly? Obviously you feel that anyone who buys a DVD is supporting an evil organization. But not everyone has such fantacism about it. Rather than chasting fellow /.'ers about not boycotting DVDs, perhaps you should make aware more realistic and effective options.

For example, Slashdotters could donate money to Epic.org or EFF.org. Write a letter to the editor of your local newspaper or a periodical. Some TV stations will let community members appear on their newsshows to give feedback. Has anyone considered doing this (in an educational, polite, non-flaming way, of course.)

There are a lot more effective ways to help bring about the end of this ridiculous lawsuit than boycotting DVDs.

I'll get off my soapbox now! =)

Re:An answer

[Kaa]

Real Networks fucked up a LONG time ago.

A pedantic correction. "Fucked up" implies unintended consequences, e.g. they didn't really want to collect personal info on people, but it just happened anyway. RealNetworks didn't fuck up. They intentionally, consciously, and deliberately set to collect all information about their users that they could get their littly grubby hands on. So, no, it wasn't a fuck-up. What it seems to be is a rather strong incompatibility between Glaser's value system and my own.

Kaa

Re:It really should be illegal...

[seichert]

When are people going to get it? Always looking to the law to solve your problems. What are you going to do when the law can't reach these people(like when they operate in a foreign country)? Instead you need to be more aware of how to protect yourself and read privacy warnings like this. Use technology and the internet to solve this problem. Why don't you write a script that parses through a privacy policy looking for key words like "URL, IP, log",etc.

On a side note such scripts would be useful for congressional bills as well.
Stuart Eichert

Re:ZoneAlarm caught them

[latro]

Yeah, the documentation is pretty sparse (and the text log is nice, but it doesn't really give you that much info).

OTOH, is there really much more you want to do if you are being pinged/scanned? From what I can tell, ZoneAlarm reacts to those requests as if there were no computer present - so the people scanning are just getting no response back. (this is just what i got from testing at grc.com - I could be wrong!)

I have tried tracking down some IPs, but they are usually spoofed or just belong to some hapless cable modem user who doesn't even realize they have a trojan running on their machine. Now I just ignore them and just make sure nothing weird is being sent out.

As far as the client/server thing, I just downloaded RealPlayer super basic bare bones (I broke down and got it because two fav. radio stations only use real player format for their online broadcast). I told ZA to let it access the internet but NOT act as a server - I can still listen to music, so I guess that works - could work with netzip - don't know since I got the most basic real player I could.

-------

Re:I am sparticus

[AdamJ]

Why don't we instead ask them to be open about their data collection, and give us the option of disabling it if we wanted? It seems to make more sense to me than launching attacks on their servers and forcing them to take more secretive measures.

If RealNetworks wants to know that I listen to LiveAudioWrestling every Sunday evening or Monday afternoon, and throughout the week listen to commentaries in RealAudio by some individual wrestlers, why do I care? If it can improve the quality of the service (And I'm skeptical about whether it can, but this is a hypothetical situation), I don't see any problem with letting them know what I'm listening to.

(And yes, I'm aware that RealPlayer isn't the program in question, but it's the only software from RealNetworks that I use.)

Adam

And so, the battle is lost ... Re:I am sparticus

[gilroy]

Quoth the poster:

If RealNetworks wants to know that I listen to LiveAudioWrestling every Sunday evening or Monday afternoon, and throughout the week listen to commentaries in RealAudio by some individual wrestlers, why do I care?

Because your habits are none of their business? Because they can use that make compile a profile of you? Because the security of that profile is not mentioned, much less proven?

As long as people are willing to trade their privacy for (in this case) hypothetical conveniences --- "Here's my DNA, where's my free Happy Meal?" --- we will face a long, hard, uphill battle to secure the details of our lives. *Sigh*

Re:And so, the battle is lost ... Re:I am sparticu

[AdamJ]

Because your habits are none of their business?

It's really none of your business either, but I'm willing to admit that I use RealPlayer to listen to wrestling related content. For that matter, I use WMP for the same purpose too, on a different site.

If I was listening to or watching more questionable material, perhaps I would not feel this way, which is why I suggested that companies that wish to collect data about their users ask in a more open way than the license agreement, and give you the opportunity to disable the data collection if you wish to do so.

Because they can use that make compile a profile of you?

Adam's Realplayer Profile: Listens to wrestling shows for approximately 3 hours each week.

Send in the market droids! I watch and listen to wrestling, and I'm not afraid to admit it! Quick, shill those posters at me, those PPV videos, the collectors edition of Mick Foley's Mr Socko!

Oh, wait. They already do that during the commercials, and I don't mind a bit.

Because the security of that profile is not mentioned, much less proven?

This bothers me little. I've admitted it on Slashdot. Now Everyone Knows.

I've said it in previous posts, and I'll say it again: If this sort of information could be gathered and used to customize the type of advertising I see, I wouldn't mind one bit.

I know that's going against the common publicly stated (Vocal Minority, perhaps?) opinion here, but that's my opinion.

Adam

What about Aureate?

[Jenova]

I was testing the Win32 Netscape Communicator under WINE the few days ago and a netstat revealed a connection to Aureate networks @ port 1975. This connection never appeared under Netstat in Windows. I realised that this is a trojan horse installed by Go!zilla and would launch whenever the browser is being run.

Now I read about NetDemon tracking URLs and stuff like that. It really makes you worry about downloading 'free beer' programs from the net. Companies usually want something out of you for using 'free' stuff. I guess I stick with open source programs from now on. More assurance of privacy and security.

Re:What about Aureate?

[up2ng]

I have no affiliation with the following:
Steve Gibson has been a real help to many with his Shields Up! and SpinRite, but a little known program on his site will take out the Aureate VIRUS.
Everyone that uses CuteFTP and many other shareware programs have the Aureate VIRUS in thier computer. It is installed with the program With NO UNINSTALL PROGRAM !
It sits, and waits for an internet connection to send constant information back to ads(x).adsoftware.com and there have been a lot of problems with system lockups because the software can't make contact !


From the ABOUT tab in the program
The OptOut Web Site at http://grc.com/optout.htm contains an extensive summary of the issues and problems surrounding the use of advertising agent programs, parasites, and spyware. You will also find extensive information about OptOut's current capabilities (they will keep growing). Please click the link above to visit our site to learn about this problem and OptOut.
--

Me again: It is small 38k, written in assembler and is free (as in beer) until sometime in July.
Get it and use it And RTF Agreements BEFORE installing software on your machines !!!!!


- Save The Whales ,Collect the whole set !

Re:More power to them

[Mr Z]

You don't have to send the ones with pretty pictures. A pack of 5"x7" cards from the local store would do just fine. And, they'd be a damn sight cheeper if everyone used them for mail instead of envelopes and stationery.

--Joe

PS. Stationary means not moving, and stationery is the paper you write letters on.

--

Re:Online Privacy Policies

[Staciebeth]

Right now the world is spared IP tracking by MRA because, frankly, we wouldn't know how. Other than a part time off-site sysadmin I'm it for techies. But we are a membership organization and many of our members are marketing research firms that are not so, ahem, ignorant. MRA doesn't want your data, we have our hands full keeping track of our members. But they do want your data. It's what fuels thier business.

I thought I was the only one.

[Talonius]

Downloaded Realplayer to watch something I don't even remember now.. oh, fav' radio station here in St. Louis is online now, uses RealPlayer to stream. Anyway, I downloaded RealPlayer, installed, ran it.. told it NOT to create shortcuts for those damnable programs on my Desktop. Know what really bugs me? The installer created them on my start menu. Not a big deal; right click, delete, but JESUS. If I left everything I have on my computer in default configuration, I wouldn't be able to find a thing. When's it stop?

Got really pissed when ZoneAlarm started sounding alerts. That program is awesome btw. (www.zonelabs.com; if you don't have it, GET IT.) Got even more pissed when GetRight no longer functioned. Wanted to scream when I discovered that not only had DD replaced GetRight, but it SUCKS ROCKS, insists on maximizing at odd times, and just generally got in the way.

No thanks; I register my shareware so I don't have to stare out those ads. You want to know what I do on the Internet? Pay someone else to GUESS. If I wanted someone tracking me, I'd join "AllAdvantage.Com!" At least they pay you with cold hard cash. (NOTE: That is NOT an endorsement for alladvantage.com!)

Think on this though: anyone know of a small company that's managing to compete, hasn't been swallowed by a bigger fish, and respects all the rules? (Winzip?) If you can think of one, support it. :p

B.

Re:Oh no! People are responsible for themselves!

[0xdeadbeef]

FYI, Chomsky is an anarchist who probably hates the government more than you do. He's certainly gone to great lengths trying to expose the murder our government encourages (and commits) in the name of foreign policy.

FYI #2, it is still up in the air on whether click-through licenses are actually legally binding, mainly because nobody takes them seriously, and therefore do not read them. And besides, Real knows full well that people do not read them, so hiding the admission of some extremely intrusive behavior of its software inside the license rather than making it obvious on the download page or on a privacy statement shows an extreme amount of contempt for their users' privacy, and therefore they deserve all the bad publicity we can generate.

FYI #3, if you still think anyone who signs (or clicks) something without reading it is a moron (and I'm inclined to agree with you), consider a bill that was recently passed by the Republican controlled Senate:
http://cryptome.org/4th-sneaky.htm.

If MP could play real files

[gad_zuki!]

Why not use windows media player? First off, it doesn't collect data on you, beg for new upgrades every so often, is *stable*, and comes with the OS. If you're using Win98 you might as well use a stable media player instead of bitching about how buggy Windows is and how the people at Real are mini-fascists.

If it did steam real files I'd delete RP in a second.

Re:More power to them

[luckykaa]

I would debate this point with you. First, can you give me your name, address, email address, and age.

Naturally I'm not going to give you more information than I feel like giving about myself to you because my privacy means something to me.

COPPA And Real

[sqlrob]

Is it possible that Real could be charged under COPPA?

Let's say someone's kid downloads a program from a COPPA compliant site. However, since RA was installed, it uses the download demon (sic, intentionally). Now some unauthorized data collection is occurring. The site is either now unintentionally violating COPPA or Real is intentionally violating COPPA. That is something like $10,000 / day fine isn't it?

(Of course, the usual IANAL applies)

sooner or later, this will come to a head

[Wansu]

At some point, data such as this will be used to spectacularly ruin someone's life. Perhaps a class of people will be screwed over en masse. I can imagine so many scenarios that there ain't no telling exactly what form this will take. It isn't a question of if; it's a question of when. Some person, group, company or government is bound to do it. The temptation is too great. Such a disaster is what will be required to get everyone's attention. We can warn people of the evils of all this glitzy Windows crap until we're blue in the face. They will not listen until it hits them where it hurts, in the wallet.

OK then

[delevant]

If you don't need your privacy, please post the following pieces of information:

• Your social security number, or other national equivalent determined by your residency.
• Your passport number.
• Your drivers license number or equivalent.
• The maiden name of your mother.
• The account numbers of all bank accounts you own.
• The type, size, and location of the most expensive objects you possess. I'm especially interested in easily-portable objects like rings, watches, necklaces, etc.
• The names, ages, locations and favorite toys of any family members under the age of twelve.
• The location and type of any firearm you own.
• Your current street address, along with the location and type of all windows or other entrances into your home.
• Does your home have a dog? If so, what is it's favorite food? I'll need to sedate it.
• The brand and model number of any security devices in your home.

Now then, if you really "don't need your privacy" you'll honestly and truthfully supply all of the above information. If you don't answer these questions, consider yourself a hypocrite.

. . . or perhaps you really DO need some privacy after all.

Re:OK then

[aliastnb]

Certainly.

My NI Number is available to anyone who requests it for a legitimate purpose. Prove your purpose is legitimate and you can have it.

I don't own a passport or driver's license.

My mother's maiden name is Beaumont. God knows how that'll help you though, because there are millions of Beumonts in the world and I've never used her name as a password. Ever.

Again, prove you have a legitimate interest and I'll gladly supply my Bank account number.

I don't own a lot of value. What I do own is insured, but the only thing that's going to be easliy taken is my Rio. It's broken, and lost in the house somewhere anyway.

I have no family members under twelve.

I don't owna gun. It's illegal in this country.

My house is located about 50 yards south-south west of the Jaguar delaership, north-west England.

You can look at the windows for yourself. They're not too hard to see.

I don't have a dog.

And I've no idea what brand or model the burglar alarm is. it's just a panel in the wall to me.

Re:More power to them

[John Napkintosh]

Thats an entirely different issue. When I bought my house I didn't give anyone the right to peek into it to see what I'm doing. But when I download this absolutely free software that provides me with free entertainment I know I'm giving them more than just my IP address.

Now that I think of it, if someone where willing to give me a house for free I might let a representative from some housing association drop by every now and then to see what TV shows I watch or see what I eat for dinner.

all depends

[gnarphlager]

as I said, different agendas. The problem I see is not necessarily with the unavailablity of the source per se (I'm not an open source zealot, but I do like it in many cases). The problem is the way that the DVD-CCA is handling things. Ditto the MPAA. Until they start to care more about the parties they represent rather than the governing body itself, then I'd prefer to see no industry.

Kinda like the music industry. Major labels screw bands big time. As an artist, I don't like that, and refuse to buy major label cds unless I can buy them from the band directly, where they get to see more of the money (which they do).

You're right though; it's difficult to come up with an "overall perfect example" because we're all looking at these issues with different perspectives.

OT: thanks for the link

[pnevares]

Thanks for the link to ZoneLabs, I hadn't heard of that program before. I've been using it for a few minutes and it looks pretty useful.

Pablo Nevares, "the freshmaker".

Re:It really should be illegal...

[superlame]

They are creating a program for the express purpose of doing one thing: aiding downloads. It is bundled without mention with other Real software, and it installs itself without permission as the default file-download handler on your system. But what it does is provide RealNetworks with unprecedented access to the downloading habits of users; it's not software it's a trojan horse! Its most useful function is to real, and its method of inclusion is suspicious. They don't need that data to make anything for you more convenient -- it is entirely to aid their marketing program!

They will be able to better aid downloads in the next version if they know more about what people are downloading. Or so they will claim if they are asked.

They shouldn't be allowed to do that. I don't know how to stop them, but that shit should be illegal. Or at least force them to advertise functions which do not directly relate to the purpose you bought the software for: it's like buying a word processor with an undocumented feature which changes your networking settings, it's not what you bought it to do.

It should remain legal, just like it currently is. We already have too many laws. It is sheep like you, wanting the government to fix your dislikes that is helping to ruin this country (the other major problem is big companies buying government, but that's another rant). If you don't like that program, don't buy it. And please, try and convince your friends not to buy it.

This is why free software is important

[Anonymous Coward]

As our computers become greater extentions of ourselves, what they are made to do will reflect what we want done -- their actions reflect our wishes.

Surely, anyone with a concern for their privacy, wouldn't want all their intentions divulged, would they? But, how can you be sure the software you use is doing what you want, and only what you want?

Clearly, when the source is open, it is difficult to hide such shenanegans (yes, Real is being open about this, but what about others?). When the source is free, we have the luxery of as many eyes as care interested in reviewing it.

While I don't agree with RMS that proprietary software, or use thereof, is inherently evil, I do think that if we care about our liberty and privacy, it behooves us to use and support free software, where appropriate. - RSH

Re:Netzip privacy statement is *long* reading

[superlame]

When it comes to such statements, long reading should be translated into Just Say No. That's my rule of thumb.

Re:Download Demon, NOT RealPlayer

[john_uy]

Actually Yes.

I've previously used RealPlayer for streaming audio. However, after I tried Windows Media Player, the quality of sound is better (at the same bitrate.) I don't have to get all the advertisments too.

I downloaded Windows Media Player 6.0 BETA and it is great! Really great visual features but it is a little buggy at the moment.

Try WML, I don't think they (Microsoft) catches data since when you check on the URL, it is usually redirected to a URL but at least it is for them to "track" how many people use the URL (more acceptable for me.) At the same time, you can track the URL and do not need to redirect all the time.

Well maybe better, just listen to the radio and talk over the telephone. At least it is more "secure" than the Internet.

John

a letter I sent to real in a rage (sorry)

[cthonious]

subject: FUCK REAL
Date: Sun, 19 Mar 2000 15:06:41 -0600
From: Me
To: webmaster@real.com, rglaser@real.com, glaser@real.com, admin@real.com, root@real.com, support@real.com, everyone@real.com

You people are fucking incredible. why can't you just release a player for linux that doesn't fucking EXPIRE? What a bunch of horse cock sucking ass ramming uncle fucking christ humping fucking NITWITS. I HATE real bullshit. Why are you spamming the net with your motherfucking worthless trashy protocols, churning new releases fucking CONSTANTLY just to PISS people off??!

My real player, which I finally got working after HOURS of searching your fucking LAME site which is obfuscated beyond fucking belief, just expired. WHY? It was the ONLY one I EVER got working.

Well, now I'm downloading your latest 8MB obscenity. It says it's for red hat, which I DO NOT FUCKING HAVE. NOT EVERY FUCKING LINUX USER HAS RED HAT ASSHOLE. Probably you compiled this huge hulking stinky bitch for glibc 2.1, in which case it will not work on my machine, dumb fuck.

One last thing: FUCK YOU. FUCK YOUR WORTHLESS SHIT. I only wish Rob Glaser would read this, that fat, anal ass ramming geeky, butt munching ass clown fuck nut. Unfortunately some tech flunky will read it and delete. Just get this: I hate you, I hate your worthless fucking company, and everything it makes.

Rob Glaser needs to be fucked in his pimply ass by a rabid polar bear, drawn and quartered, tarred and feathered, torn apart by wild horses, burned and scattered to the fucking winds. Please forward this to his stupid smug ass now.

FUCK YOU.

Re:More power to them

[bitchazz]

This should be modded up...this is a perfectly relevant viewpoint; whoever marked it as a TROLL just because it is not a popular opinion should be banned from ever have mod privilidges again.

The Responsibility is ours...

[c0rw1n]

For better or worse, technology may as well be magic for most users. So, those of us who "Get It" have a responsibility. Namely, WE must watch the watchers and inform the world when corporations/governments cross the line. Don't expect them to act in our best interests. They never will. But we can catch them in the act. Real just got caught (again). Perhaps someday, they will learn that we are watching too...

Re:Download Demon, NOT RealPlayer

[ViceClown]

Excellent points! I couldn't agree more. At the risk of becoming flaimbait - Windows Media Player sounds better, crashes less often, doesn't have any god-forsaken ads stuck in my face, and... as far as I know.. doesn't send private information back to M$.

DoubleClick!

[LaNMaN2000]

We need to ensure that this gets the same attention that caused DoubleClick shares to drop over 25% in a week. Only when they realize that their shareholders will not stand for this assault on consumer privacy will they alter their policy.

It is all a matter of publicity; most consumers have the impression that what they do not know--or take the time to read in the license agreement--cannot hurt them. With the passage of UCITA in various states, it has become clear that the terms of the license agreement should be compared in the same way as price when making an informed buying decision. Until people realize this, the only hope we have of avoiding agreements like Real's is to use the media to inform consumers.

ZoneAlarm caught them

[markalot]

Howdy,

I just installed RA last night on win2k, funny coincidence. ZoneAlarm from ZoneLabs started warning me as soon as I restarted that something was up. First, Real Jukebox wanted to access the internet. Now way, Sorry. Then something called main_program (I think, this is from memory) tried to access the internet. Again, no way.

At this point I started to uninstall all the crap that I didn't ask for. When I got to the Zip download thing, after I hit the uninstall program they provided, main_program wanted to access the internet again. jeez, these people are desperate for stats I guess.

So not only does is keep track of download stats, it also wants to know when you install and un-install the app.

--mark

Re:ZoneAlarm caught them

[technos]

Pretty good bit of software.. I'll be introducing my Windows-using friends to it. They wouldn't let me GIVE them a firewall, but they're going to install this..

Thanks..

Re:ZoneAlarm caught them

[latro]

just wanted to add more positive feedback on ZoneAlarm - very happy with it.

Not that this is the best test for it, but if you go to GRC you can use their "sheilds up" section to test what info your Windows machine is giving out. Using it before and after installing ZoneAlarm was very informative. (of course, you could always run the portscans yourself from another machine, but I'm lazy!).

I recommend this software to all my windows friends with cable modems - script kiddies just love to target those @home & roadrunner IP blocks! I get at least 2-3 scans a day looking for trojans.

-------

Re:More power to them

[kirwin]

If you open your curtains, you are entering a legally binding contract with the sun stating that to compensate for the free illumination, you must allow people the access to see into your living space.

Real Player 7

[Anonymous Coward]

National Public Radio has put a lot of their content on the web- using the Real Player format, so I downloaded the free player, "Basic Version 7". It worked great, so I downloaded a copy for my mother a week or so later. This second download was different from the first -- it included the Download Demon, and its associated Windows tray icon (plus a couple of other crappy tray icons, too). Right away Download Demon wanted to "manage" all application upgrades. NO THANK YOU. I used control panel to remove just the "Download Demon" and "Real Jukebox". It's just a matter of time before that escape route will be cut off -- (AOL 5, anyone?).

Caveat emptor is no excuse

[Robert Link]

If only it were that simple. Have you used any commercial software lately? If you have, then you know that a several page long "license agreement" laden with incomprehensible legalese has become de rigueur for even the most trivial piece of software. Moreover, the sum total of most of these agreements is something along the lines of "You are about to install a piece of software. Use at your own risk." As a result, clicking on "Agree" has become a meaningless ritual. Personal responsibility or not, it isn't reasonable to put critical information inside a body of text that is generally acknowledged as being content-free. Reality check: could you get away with selling a box of breakfast cereal laced with strychnine just because you listed it right after polysorbate 60 in the ingredients list? Hell, no.

Does this come as any surprise to Real? Quite the contrary, they know that people generally read at most the first page of those agreements; they were counting on it. They could have put the notice about the software's logging in big bold letters at the top of the agreement, but they didn't. Why? Because they knew many people wouldn't agree to it; that's why. You can scream "caveat emptor" until you're blue in the face, but the fact is that a merchant that cheats his customers is still a villain, even if the customers should have known better than to be taken in.

-rpl

Gaol?

[Ed Avis]

Is there a technical solution to this?

Some sort of bionic-chroot-on-steriods might be the answer for running untrusted binary-only software. FreeBSD has jail() which is like an improved version of chroot(), but what's needed here is something more sophisticated.

Ideally you'd make it so that _all_ access to the outside world can be filtered through some userland process. Preferably a Perl program, hehehe. This is roughly what I have in mind:

filter_syscall() {
if (call is 'open file for reading') {
if (filename one of those allowed) {
return OKAY;
} else {
modify the 'open' call so the mode is
set to read-only; return OKAY;
}
} else if (call is 'read') {
return OKAY;
} else if (call is 'send data over network') {
check to see if the data is being sent
back to RealNetworks - if it is then
return FAIL_SILENTLY;

else return OKAY;
} else {
/* Not recognized */
warn("program is doing systemcall we haven't
seen before");
return FAILURE;
}
}

It could be quite a lot of work to do this _fully_ for any large program, but a quick hack to allow all system calls except those sending private data, or to overwrite any private data being sent with 'X' characters, might be quite easy.

Re:Not mine

[ConceptJunkie]

If you really did that, tell us what you did!

Otherwise, keep to yourself.

Rick

Wrong mantra...

[Anonymous Elf]

Question: "Unless you've got something to hide, why do you need your privacy?"

Answer: If you have nothing to protect, then you need no privacy.

"Unless you've got a credit card, why do you need to hide your social security number?"

"Unless you've got a house, why do you need keys and a lock?"

"Unless you've got money in a vault, why do you need a combination?"

"Unless you've got children, why do you need to not inform strangers of their whereabouts, interests, and route home from school?"

"Unless you've got a power-hungry government, why do you have to encrypt political dissent?"

"Unless you've got absolutely nobody in the world that wants anything you got, why do you need security, privacy, a strong lock, and a damn good lawyer?"

What if this were Jiffy-Loob???

[Xiphoid Process]

This kind of snooping is so obviously a violation of privacy, i wonder if it is already covered with existing laws. If you took your car to a Jiffy Loob for an oil change, and they decided to install a GPS enabled oil-filter and they then logged all you travels in a database, there would be a huge public outcry, and probably a slew of lawsuits. How is Real's bahavior any diferent. This makes me ill.

- Josh "Yoshi" Steiner

---
Xiphoid Process Records - http://xiphoidprocess.com
San Francisco based electronic music.

They just steal my money!

[marat]

All this people from Radiate and Real - do they think I got Internet access for free? We pay for every last byte sent or received - that is not only a security issue. And my Internet channel have limited width - how much of these daemons our company network could bear?

Nice.

[BenLutgens]

One thing that has always pissed me off about windows software is how it does things without your permission / knowledge. This is just one more example. One thing that comes to mind is how a luser is prompted with a nasty error message when he tries to change his swap-file settings. "Do you want windows to manage your wapfile?" I say "Fuck NO!" then it will go so far as to not say anything about writing registry keys that will automagically forward emails to all you contacts. What the fuck? This must be a feature too. Hey Bill if you re reading this (yeah right) You should be ashamed of yourself! And Real networks should have a class action law-suit filed against them for invasion of privacy. And people wonder why I refuse to use windows and windows only software.

Download Demon, NOT RealPlayer

[Percible]

Folks, you might want to read the article. The problem is with a piece of software called Download Demon, a part of Netzip, NOT Realplayer. It's the same company, and you might want to stop using their products on principle, but don't rush off to find an alternative to Realplayer just because you're worried it'll track personal information...

What would you rather have, Windows Media Player?

~P

Re:Download Demon, NOT RealPlayer

[MadSwede]

True, this instance, it's a different piece of Real software. Still, I've been more and more convinced that RealPlayer is a virus, not an app and have beeen advising people to avoid it at all costs. Example, when installing RealPlayer G2 Plus, the installer also downloads and installs RealJukebox and some garbage called Net2Phone without so much as a by your leave. RealJukebox is easy to uninstall, but not so Net2Phone. N2P adds itself all over your registry, insinuating itself into Internet Explorer, adding to the tools menu. Even after uninstalling N2P, the changes to IE remain. I had to go through and nuke the bastard manually throughout the registry on my gf:s computer. Maybe it's not a big deal, but any Software company that takes these kinds of liberties with a system deserves nothing but scorn and ridicule, IMO. Granted, almost every installer for Windoze adds "features" without custome install options - Windows2000 springs to mind, but after a RealPlayer install, the amount of work to get rid of all these features is ridiculous. -- Boycott Real - Play UnReal instead :)

Re:Download Demon, NOT RealPlayer

[crazy_speeder]

What would you rather have, Windows Media Player?

i would like to see sites stream mpeg video. then i can have a variety of players.

Re:Windows Media Player 7.0 doesn't...

[Anonymous Coward]

Whoa. I almost fell over when I read that.

Please put a warning in your message next time. Something like "CAUTION: Non-Anti-Microsoft post." Have a heart, fella.

Not mine

[Steven Woston]

I went in and hacked the code so it doesn't do that anymore.

Re:Not mine

[Steven Woston]

I wish I could explain but it isn't the sort of thing I could explain here, and even if I could you wouldn't understand it. Kinda technical. If I'm feeling nice I may compile an exe or something for you, but don't bet on it.

I am sparticus

[spazimodo]

Rather than getting indignant every time Real (or similar companies) are found violating peoples privacy like this, why don't we just work towards obfuscating their data set. What about a little hack that sent random junk data to them rather than whatever it is they're trying to collect?

This could have the additional benefit of making companies act more overtly about their data collections, if that is the only way they can successfully collect accurate information.


-Spazimodo

Fsck the millennium, we want it now.

What are their motives?

[BigStink]

I really have to wonder what Real's motives for this are. Now that this news has emerged, that Real have yet again tried to poke their noses into people's privacy, their reputation is going to take another hammering.

But I can't see where the payoff is for Real. I imagine that if everyone in the world was to use Download Demon for every download they ever made, then the resulting sending of information back to Real would cost them a small fortune in bandwidth. I can't see that they're going to make much money selling the information on either - if companies are particularly interested in finding out who's downloading their products then they usually make the user register or fill in a form before downloading.

Real's main software product, Real Player, is losing market share to Windows Media Player so it seems that Real needs all the goodwill it can get in order to survive. Although the majority of computer/internet users are not overly worried by the issue of privacy (certainly not to the same extent as the average Slashdot reader), more and more of their potential customers are going to become disillusioned every time Real pull a stunt like this.

Re:What are their motives?

[soldack]

Their motives are pretty simple. They want to know what things people download. By knowing what a person (or IP in this case) download's they can guess what they are interested in. By knowing what they are interested in they can make targeted advertising.
Freeware supported through advertising is here to stay. Given the fact that you are going to see ads, what is wrong with the ads being for things that you are really interested in?
What is the big deal anyway? I could really care less if everyone knew where I surfed and what I downloaded, especially if their purpose is to help me avoid pointless ads.
The only thing that they are guilty of is bad software design. The "Download Demon" should make it clear that it is being installed, what it does, and how to remove it. Removal should be simple and complete. This isn't a privacy issue, though. It is just badly written software.

Online Privacy Policies

[Staciebeth]

Download Demon may well claim that "this is all anonymous, we don't link names with activity, blah blah blah" but as we have seen in the past with DoubleClick (who just created a special privacy panel within their company to act as window dressing while addressing privacy issues) companies start out collecting 'anonymous' data and then later suddenly decide to link the data to names.

I work in Marketing Research, where data collection is mostly what we do and so privacy issues, especially internet privacy, is "suddenly" a hot topic. MRA has a forum where any marketing research issue, including how you feel about your privacy, can be addressred. If you are interested in having some voice in how that data is used and collected, please post at www.mra-net.org/forum/. MRA sets a lot of marketing research industry standards which our members follow, and I'd rather privacy was a bigger concern, not a brief one or two lines buried in policies somewhere. We don't even have a privacy policy right now.

You can keep marketing research from doing what other industries are doing.

*shrug*

Re:Online Privacy Policies

[swinge]

so, the MRA is looking to add "reads Slashdot" to the list of IP addresses it tracks? Like you said... you don't have a privacy policy.

Re:Online Privacy Policies

[Staciebeth]

MRA members must sign (every year, not just when they join) a Code of Data Collection Standards. Note: Enforcement is pretty much on the honor principle.) Right now the code does NOT reflect the ability to track people via cookies, etc. Whatever my feelings about privacy are (I spend more time than I'd like to admit refusing to give out my SSN, and then explaining why it is a bad choice to use the SSN as an all purpose ID) I alone cannot rewrite MRA policy. There is an Internet Ethics Task Force in the process of evaluating how the Association should respond to modern data collection. However, a lot of these people are not computer savvy (or even computer literate) and are not fully aware of the concerns many informed consumers have regarding privacy and data collection. If you want a chance to perhaps influence them, you can post a message in the forum or e-mail me or the general e-mail box and express your concerns.

Spam them to Hell!

[Roger_Wilco]

What we need is a snappy little program that sends an enormous quantity of valid-looking information in their format. That way they'll be unable to determine what's real and what's realistic giberish.

Re:It really should be illegal...

[Northern Hunter]

There is a big huge gaping hole in your opinion. The fact of the matter is that most people aren't smart enough, like you and I. Therefore companies that do such bad things will always profit, survive, and maybe even crush the competition who are not doing such bad things.

That's why we have a lot of laws in the first place! That's why "buyer beware" has never cut it in many many situations.

Now this situation doesn't result in anyone losing money or property without compensation(*), which is what most of our laws deal with. It deals with the loss of privacy.

Does privacy deserve the same protection as property? Does it deserve any protection at all? Is the shrink-wrap license enough?

I think a lot of us would argue quite successfully that yes, it deserves a hell of a lot more protection than it has now, and no, shrink wrap licenses should not be valid for half the stuff that is often in them.

There are certain types/sizes of 'contracts' which are valid when made 'in passing', and others that need a lot more than an 'in passing' contract, that need signed documents, adequate two party communication and understanding, and adequate compensation. How many of us have heard of contracts or events being overturned by courts because there wasn't a signed contract? We all know that there are some contracts that the courts won't enforce with at least a token measure of compensation. And some that aren't enforcable when that token is effectively meaningless. And others that are deemed 'fraud' because the 'contract' was so obscured and desceptive.

Personally I think this world will degenerate into hell if we don't produce an adequately balanced system of legislative, enforcement, and legislative system. Human beings in general are just too stupid to 'figure it all out for themselves' and solve it through individual actions as you suggest.(**)

-NH

(*) Here's a unique argument. Information *IS* property. We've got that ingrained in our society. So how come this information isn't worth anything or isn't protected? Shouldn't I be in control of who obtains this information from my life? Shouldn't taking this information without my consent or compensation be illegal?

Now of course it was in the disclaimer/shrink-wrap license. And you are getting 'compensation' in the form of software that does work for you. But is that enough?

If someone came up with a new way to screw people over and get 10-50 bucks from them without them really noticing that they had agreed to it, don't you think there would be a clamour to deal with it legislatively? We've already done so in many cases. We're seriously cracking down on phone-'fraud' organizations that do this exact thing to old and gullible people.

(**) Some of us don't like having to wade through the shit that your idiot friends effectively allow in this world. And some of us take pity on your idiot friends who are in effect powerless to protect themselves or change the world, because hey, they're idiots. And most of us take deep offence to shucksters and con-men depriving the weak of their property and rights.

IE: If you want to go live in the wild west, take your damn six shooters with you, we don't want your kind around here.

sick of advertising?

[soldack]

So you want a company to spend their time and money on creating and running a great site but you expect them not to use advertising?
You realize that by using junkbuster you are hurting the sites you are visiting that depend on advertising revenue. Personally, I think that longer download times are a small price to pay for a great site, like /. or CNN.com. If you eliminated all the ads, you would have to revert to a pay-per-view or subscription based model. I think that it is very important that free mediums still exist. Advertising allows companys to create sites that everyone can use, rich or poor.

Re:excellent alternative: GetRight

[cicho]

GetRight installs Aureate spyware, doesn't it? Different company, same idea.

NEWS: New version of Real s/w bundles Netzip

[Cy Guy]

According to this article Real has just released a new product that bundles RealAudio/Video, RealJukebox, and Netzip (which they have renamed RealDownload) together into a single product called Real Entertainment Center.

Re:Windows Media Player 7.0 doesn't...

[ConceptJunkie]

After downloading and installing the WMP 7.0 beta under NT 4.0, I found out that they don't recommend installing it under NT 4.0 or Win95.

Wotta crock!

Of course the installer keeps crapping out so I can't get the latest beta update anyway.

If it's not MP3 or MPEG video, I just don't bother anymore.

Two points

[spiralx]

One: "Fucked up" can also imply making a mistake as well as unforseen consequences - gnarhplager's usage was correct. Two: you're being way too pedantic over this, of course so am I but who cares :)

Faulty logic

[Kryptonomic]

Since I have nothing to hide this does not concern me, and should not concern you unless you have something to hide.

So, if something doesn't bother you it shouldn't bother anyone else either? And if it bothers someone, he/she must be a criminal.

Tell me, is it nice living in such a fantasy world of pure black and white?

You say you don't have things to hide. Well, congratulations. However, most of us do have things we prefer to keep away from prying eyes. Nothing criminal. Just petty, boring details such as our credit card number, sex life, political/religious affiliation, medical history and other things which in the end paint rather a detailed picture of each of us.

And you know what. Just as I am entitled to decide how much and which of my own feelings I show to others, I am also within my rights to keep these other petty details of my life secret. It's not a question of trying to hide something dirty. It's about controlling your own life and not letting other people run it for you. Being able to say "fuck you" to aggressive salesmen/advertisers, politicians or law enforcement agents trying to reach too far into your personal space.

Re:More power to them

[luckykaa]

No, the contract is with the Solarian photographers who spy on us with their cameras. The sun is simply a mass of very powerful camera flashes.

excellent alternative: GetRight

[studboy]

in addition to continuing stalled downloads, GetRight will:

enforce a "speed limit" when you're surfing and downloading at the same time. (Screensaver turns off the limit.)

automatically search FTP archives for alternate sites

download the same file from multiple sites (first half from site A, 2nd half from B)

allow each file to have a priority -- d/l short files first if you want, or

pause/continue for each file

I've been using it for maybe a year, and actually bought a copy -- $20 (shareware). If you use Winders, this software is essential. I just wish someone would write a version for Linux!

- j

Re:More power to them

[hellbilly]

This point has been beaten to death so I will keep it short. Thrashing privacy while posting as an Anonymous Coward?

Nudie Suit. Discuss.

the new black gold.

[ThatGuy47]

this may be a touch OT, but hear me out...

as we've all said by now, market research is the new gold. in a society where information is transforming from commodity into currency itself, it's not surprising that every company wants to know the buying habits of you and your three rabid gibbons.

i've noticed this on several levels. free software using sneaky tactics to get your download/spending habits is only the latest example. the more frightening example, however, is when companies demand to know how many pellets you feed your bunny or they won't support the product warranty.

i noticed this last example with a DOD ice box chorus pedal i bought from a music store. they wanted to know, amongst other things, what magazines i read and if i had 'logged on to the Internet' in the last month. i don't have the registration card in front of me (they didn't even pay for the postage), but the fine print said something akin to "we will not support problems with this pedal blowing up and taking your precious guitar, amp, MIDI system, and the west side of your house with it, if you do not return this card with the entire requested information".

so, what this boils down to, is that companies like DOD will sell you a product at an inflated price, and then expect you to give them information which is worth more than the profit they just made off of the purchase of said product, or they will not be responsible for any defects or otherwise in the product.

i now have an unregistered DOD product. an effects pedal is not worth my information.

--ze

Re:It really should be illegal...

[seldolivaw]

Interesting points, but I disagree still:

They will be able to better aid downloads in the next version if they know more about what people are downloading. Or so they will claim if they are asked.

Even as you say "so they will claim" you are admitting that you too see that that is obviously not what it's really for; it's self-evident that this is a marketing device. And I would love to see them show how knowing what we download most often will help speed downloads: the program doesn't mirror software or speed downloads in any way, it just allows you to resume interrupted downloads, or schedule them. Knowing what the file is is totally irrelevant to that task.

It should remain legal, just like it currently is. We already have too many laws. It is sheep like you, wanting the government to fix your dislikes that is helping to ruin this country (the other major problem is big companies buying government, but that's another rant). If you don't like that program, don't buy it. And please, try and convince your friends not to buy it.

1. Which country, precisely? Please let's not go around assuming I'm an American or anything.
2. The issue is not that I'm being forced to get the program: I'm not! I don't use this software. The issue is that the software advertises itself as being a tool for one task when its real purpose is something else entirely. And the reason I said it should be illegal, but I don't know how, is because any kind of law that would deal with it successfully would be too open to abuse. I wasn't seriously proposing legislation, more making a public wish that things were not as they are -- I'm sorry you misunderstood, I'm equally opposed to stupid legislation.

Real just rapes the user

[delmoi]

Ug, I've had some bad experiences with Real player. Back in the day, you could use MS Media player to view RMs, but certain formats didn't work. When I downloaded real player, they worked again, in Media player.

Except Real associates like every media format out there to itself.

So I removed the keys from the registry. And real put them back. Real also sets it self up to run when you boot the computer. You can change this in the windows registry, but then any time you try to view a real media file (Media player won't do it any more) it resets itself to start up on boot. And it takes forever to load. Its like ICQ with better graphic art!

Really, what these guys are doing is no better then the l4m3r skr1p7 k11dy and his Trojan horse. I can't believe they get away with this kind of behavior. And I can't believe that people still choose to encode their files in bogus proprietary formats like RM and QuickTime.

real perspective

[kuma]

this here is the macintosh user's perspective...

macintosh real player clients suck, they always have and always will. when i encounter a site has given untold amounts of money to those morons and do not provide quicktime as an alternative, i hit command-[ (that's back).

we need a quicktime player for *nux, but that does not sound like an easy project, and apple is busy with mac os x, hopefully next year ;)

many l337 posters have a windows box around just to play games, and yet never consider having an imac or g3 box to surf the net? hmmm.

quicktime server is open-source, and (i hope) will strangle real.

microsoft wants to check the growth of quicktime and challenge real, but it's too late, only the lamest windows users will ever fully rely on windows media player.

Electronic Communications Privacy Act of 1987

[yoDon]

Has anybody else read the "Electronic Communications Privacy Act of 1987"?

It has some pretty fun clauses, including:

"United States Code Sec. 2520. Recovery of civil damages authorized"

(a) In General. - Except as provided in section 2511(2)(a)(ii), any person whose
wire, oral, or electronic communication is intercepted, disclosed, or intentionally
used in violation of this chapter may in a civil action recover from the person or entity
which engaged in that violation such relief as may be appropriate.

If you want to read the full text of the law, go to your favorite search engine
and look for +"Chapter 119" +"United States Code" (I'd post a link, but
I doubt if these sites could handle the /. effect)

cheers,
-Don

Don.Alvarez@SierraNumerics.NoSpamForDinner.com

It really should be illegal...

[seldolivaw]

They are creating a program for the express purpose of doing one thing: aiding downloads. It is bundled without mention with other Real software, and it installs itself without permission as the default file-download handler on your system. But what it does is provide RealNetworks with unprecedented access to the downloading habits of users; it's not software it's a trojan horse! Its most useful function is to real, and its method of inclusion is suspicious. They don't need that data to make anything for you more convenient -- it is entirely to aid their marketing program!

They shouldn't be allowed to do that. I don't know how to stop them, but that shit should be illegal. Or at least force them to advertise functions which do not directly relate to the purpose you bought the software for: it's like buying a word processor with an undocumented feature which changes your networking settings, it's not what you bought it to do.

"You agreed to it"... bah!

[Nygard]

This article underscores the blatant problem with the "I can do anything to you, if you agreed to it" approach. (Not to mention the corollary "Tough noogie, you agreed" posters here.)

Why would there even be such an expression as "the fine print" if not because this tactic has been used for centuries. Bury the zinger in a pile of mumbo-jumbo, and people won't look hard enough to find it. Make it much easier to go for the goodie than to get a lawyer to read the screen. Then sit back and commit whatever ethical violation you can stomach.

Arrghhh!

[ViceClown]

This is becoming real annoying! How long till we have banner ads stapled to our forheads so that when we look in the mirror we can read about the latest sale?!?!?

Re:Windows Media Player 7.0 doesn't...

[Jor]

hmm, last time i checked Microsoft Media Player 7.x (whatever the current version is) does not run on my favorite Unix.

although i do not use any `Real' products because their privacy-violations really piss me off

but i got your point: if even the evil empire can produce a piece of code that does not violate human rights, why do those Realmedia guys always have to screw it?

some US citicen should sue this US company.

Surprising?

[circuskid]

How can anyone possibly be surprised by this? Real obviously has no respect for anyone's privacy. I can't understand why they keep thinking they can get away with this. And why the Linux community seem to grovel for them. I haven't been using Real products since the first privacy issue, streaming video be damned. As for streaming audio, MP3 works just fine for me.

Good riddance to Real!

[indiigo]

I stopped downloading that bloatware about a year ago after the unique identifier scandal. Recently I had a download that I really needed, and was in real format and I downloaded it just to play the file. The bloat has multiplied by 7!!!! Unbelieveable. Can't believe people put up with forced taskbar integration, and now this. It went right off after the download. Now I will just not bother... Proprietary formats aren't worth it. ANyone know if quicktime does this?

recommended FTP software?

[thenightfly42]

Is there any (Windows) software that *doesn't* track your operations? Someone in this discussion recommended GetRight, but this is one of the Aureate/Radiate pieces of software, which similarly reports all FTP transfers back to the source.

I had been using Go!Zilla, until I read that the Aureate software was tracking me. All I want is to resume my broken downloads, and perhaps queue them.

WMP or RealPlayer?

[miguelitof]

That's an easy one; WMP doesn't work in Linux, so therefore it is out for me.

I use RealPlayer when at all possible for streaming audio/video on the net, both in Windows and Linux.

I consciously refuse to install RealJukebox or any other of Real's other packages, because of their privacy issues. But RealPlayer gets points from me for their Linux support.

I just hope they quickly port over their new, licensed WMP codecs to Linux RealPlayer.

Welcome to WonkaLand!

[miguelitof]

These type of things always remind me of the giant contract that all of the children had to sign before entering the Chocolate Factory on Willie Wonka.

"Floods, fire, frost, or frippery?"

VIOLET: I can't see what it says in the bottom.

WONKA: Violet? You first. Sign here.

WONKA: Standard form of contract.

MR. BEAUREGARDE: Don't talk to me about contracts, Wonka; I use 'em myself. They're strictly for suckers.

Netzip privacy statement is *long* reading

[Seth Finkelstein]

The "Privacy Statment" for NetZip is online. I recommend reading it. It's many screens long. Yes, there is the following gem down in the middle:

Whenever a download is initiated using Netzip Download Demon, the product sends the name and URL of the file you are downloading along with relevant product and Internet communication information (including IP address, connection speed, whether downloads were finished or incomplete, use of pause and resume) to Netzip.

But how many people are ever going to read down that far?

privacy shmrivacy

[.c]

Because Netzip respects your on-line privacy and security, we disclose our information practices...

Well, that's nice -- although it does seem awfully Simpsonsish of them:

I'm going to kick the air, and if you get in the way, that's your own fault!

Re:easy solution:

[seldolivaw]

The problem is you get it bundled with other software and, apparently, it installs itself (overriding Gozilla et al) without asking permission first. To your average clueless newbie, this is a problem.

Re:More power to them

[kirwin]

Perhaps you should open the living room curtain whilst being intimate with your significant other. Would it be too difficult for you to leave your opened mail on your front porch? Maybe you would like to use the restroom with the door open while at work.

Privacy is privacy no matter what the medium. I do not want a third party to know what I am downloading, any more than I want people staring into my window while I shower.

There's nothing wrong...

[Kanasta]

assuming that they flashed the license agreement before you when you installed it. However, from the article, the user claims not to have seen such a thing in the install, and in fact implies that it may be bundles silently with other RN programs. If this is true, then it sounds like they may not even pass etrusts' criteria for privacy...


---

Re:More power to them

[locutus074]

If you don't have anything to hide then privacy shouldn't be an issue.

Then why not just use postcards for all your personal correspondance? It's certainly a bit cheaper than using envelopes and stamps.

After all, only somebody with something to hide would use an envelope, for god's sake...

--