Gator Will Replace Ads On Sites

Bill Dimm writes "This CNet article says that a new version of Gator, a browser plug-in for managing passwords that also can display pop-up ads for competing products when you visit web sites, is being developed that will launch its own ads over top of the banner ads on the sites you visit. The software achieves wide distribution by bundling (much like TopText) with file-sharing utilities, with over 18 million installations of the current version claimed on their web site."

Comments

Nothing wrong about it.

[luugi]

As long as the user knows what he's installing on his system, there's nothing illegal about it. If I downloaded a program that disabled banner adds when I visited a web site, would that be illegal?

As long a the user knows what's happening when he's intalling the software, the competitors have nothing to say.

Re:Nothing wrong about it.

[norton_I]

No, but if my Tivo replaced ads put in by the broadcasters, they would be sued, and it wouldn't really matter whether I had agreed to it or not.

I would say there is a difference between removing something (ie, adding a 30 second skip or allowing me to fast forward through ads) and replacing it with different content that is represented as the original.

Like I said, I wouldn't have a problem if the popped up ads were clearly seperate from the original content, such as in the task bar, or the toolbar of your browser, nor would I object to software that allowed the user to block out some or all ads. That is merely allowing the consumer to choose what parts of a webpage they view. Replacing content is fraudulent. End of story.

Re:Nothing wrong about it.

[BeanThere]

Gator does its best to make sure the user doesn't know it's working

There's an obvious reason for this type of behaviour. Consider: if users were informed of exactly what they are installing and exactly what it does, and then given a choice about whether to install it or not, how many users would willingly install it? My guess, none, whatsoever. Thats why they have to try hide their behaviour. If this alone doesn't make it glaringly obvious that such software should not exist (i.e. exactly 0% of users would ever willingly choose to use it), then nothing will.

Its sad how much the computer industry relies specifically on the lack of user education amongst its client base. Software companies and hardware companies thrive on it. The success of Microsofts business is built on it. "Keep the users in the dark ..". All you see in the computer industry these days is companies attempting to trick their customers, lying to their customers, fooling their customers, suckering their customers, all relying on lack of user education. Its all around. I saw a banner ad today "if this ad is flickering, you've won! click here to claim your prize". Its an animated GIF, if its not flickering it means your browser doesn't support animated gifs .. but its just another case of relying on the cluelessness of your own client base. If a company NEEDS its users to be clueless in order to survive, it shouldn't be allowed to survive, period.

Re:Nothing wrong about it.

[crucini]

What's sad is that everyone is marketing to this 'passive consumer' who is a clueless victim of his software. Everyone is buying and selling 'desktop real estate' and 'eyeballs'. The assumption is that the consumer can be led around by the nose to any destination we see fit.

I think that in real life very few consumers fit this mold. The majority are angry and scared at the way their computers and the web seem to be fighting them. I think that the ideal of the 'passive consumer' does not come from experience, but from sick fantasy.

This is acted out constantly in meetings. We have a piece of Windows software that is installed with "InstallSheild Wizard". The marketing guy was complaining that it's too intimidating - we should just quietly install the software with hardly any notification to the user. Of course the programmers say "If that happened to me, I'd be mad." And the marketing guy says, "You're not normal. Normal people don't want to see a blue screen and bunch of steps of installation."

Remember what pays for that content!

[Gumber]

We all hate ads, but remember, the ads you see help pay for the pages you see.

Gator, on the other hand is a complete and total leach. They are selling advertising on other peoples content without compensation.

Get used to it... the 'ad cold war' is coming...

[burtonator]

With Mozilla nearing 1.0 and Konqueror looking more awesome by the second, everyone should expect this type of 'ad warfare' to come to Linux/UNIX soon.

The truth is that I am *amazed* it has taken this long to happen. About 2.5 years ago I was working for a company that implemented this. It would have been a great ad revenue stream. Unfortunately the company was fucked and nothing ever happened.

The only way for companies to combat this is to deploy an 'electronic warfare' counter-attack against gator.

The sites would deploy a plugin which would detect gator modifications an remove them.

Of course this means that gator would detect it's detectors and remove them too.

The result would be an 'ad cold war' which would only leave users as victims.

This is similar to the toner wars from Diamond Age. If you don't abide by the rules expect to get into a fight...

Kevin

Re:And....

[OmegaDan]

the joke is, it dosen't uninstall even when you press uninstall, it still leaves its dlls active in the system, commet cursor does the same damn thing. The only way to get the damn thing out of your system is to use ad-aware or hunt the dlls down yourself (can be difficult sometimes)