Browser Becomes Billboard

MikeKD writes "Citing a desire to 'enhance the user experience', United Virtualities is 'preparing to introduce a product [called Ooqa Ooqa] that will allow advertisers to automatically change the appearance of Web browsers, usurping some of the functions built into popular browsers...', according to an MSNBC article--and all this supposedly without downloading any additional software. UV says a lot of sweet things about being able to turn it off and allowing the web sites to customize the degree of intrusion (from reverting to normal form when leaving to retaining the rebrand even after leaving), but does anyone think advertisers will restrain themselves? Not I." Friends don't let friends use browsers susceptible to this.

Comments

Re:Ooqa Ooqa?

[Stonehand]

Excerpt:

United Virtualities calls the product "Ooqa Ooqa," the nickname of one of the cofounder's daughters. The firm's signature product is the "shoshkeles," named after another daughter of a co-founder.

Hm. I hope the company got their permission. Having your name attached to annoying advertising methods can't be good.

Actually...

[Greyfox]

I thought that one of the key features of Mozilla was "Chrome" which would allow a web site to modify the look and feel of the browser to fit the web site.

The open source browsers have thus far been pretty immune to the obnoxiousness suffered by windows users. I was helping my room mate with a computer problem the other day and was subjected to the hideous "Real Download Manager." Someone needs to suffer for that atrocity, let me tell you...

Re:Crosses the line - big time

[Moonshadow]

There's a better solution. Every time annoying piece of javascript technology X comes out, A little regex magic gets rid of it. Check out The Proxomitron.

Is it illegal?

[crucini]

I'm ignoring the fact that this 'technology' probably doesn't exist. The same people came up with 'shoshkeles' which never worked on my browser.

New York's Computer Crime statute says:

A person is guilty of computer tampering in the fourth degree when he uses or causes to be used a computer or computer service and having no right to do so he intentionally alters in any manner or destroys computer data or a computer program of another person. Computer tampering in the fourth degree is a class A misdemeanor.

It does require the computer owner to somehow notify the intruder that unauthorized access is prohibited. But one type of notification allowed is:

(b) prominently posting written notice adjacent to the computer being utilized by the user

So print out a big sign and tape it to the side of your monitor. Meanwhile, Wyoming has this to say:

6-3-502. Crimes against intellectual property; penalties.
(a) A person commits a crime against intellectual property if he knowingly and without authorization:
(i) Modifies data, programs or supporting documentation residing or existing internal or external to a computer, computer system or computer network;...
(b) A crime against intellectual property is: (i) A felony punishable by imprisonment for not more than three (3) years, a fine of not more than three thousand dollars ($3,000.00), or both, except as provided in paragraph (ii) of this subsection;

Sounds like this technique, if it really exists, violates both laws.

And if you use Mozilla you can stop this...

[jbuilder]

Thanks to the Configurable Security Policies in Mozilla:

The gist of configuring security policies is described here:

http://www.mozilla.org/projects/security/component s/ConfigPolicy.html

The bottom of the page has examples that you can use for your 'default' security policy. You can customize them to any security policy you configure in just a few minutes.