Slashdot Mirror
Judge OKs Competitive Pop-Up Ads
Mirkon writes "A while back, U-Haul filed suit against adware giant WhenU for displaying competing advertisements to users as they browsed U-Haul's site. Friday, District Judge Gerald Bruce Lee's ruling dismissed U-Haul's suit, saying '...the fact is that the computer user consented to this detour when the user downloaded WhenU's computer software from the Internet,' and 'Alas, we computer users must endure pop-up advertising along with her ugly brother, unsolicited bulk e-mail, "spam," as a burden of using the Internet.' While the ruling was issued in the context of unfair competitive marketing, it's speculated that this will have broad implications in the fight against adware - and they aren't kind to the user. WhenU chief executive Avi Naider is unfortunately quoted as saying 'This is a victory for consumer choice -- it ultimately protects consumers' right to control what they see on their computer screens.'"
Just because adware programs choose to put other ads on top doesn't stop me from putting a white image on top. Or perhaps not even loading the image in the first place.
Sure this is already possible and lots of people do it. But the legality was often in question. (You are allowed to view the contents of the site in exchange for viewing the ads) Now with this ruling it isn't anymore.
Ad blockers are proven legal in court. That is cause for celebration isn't it?
MMO Quests are like orgasms:
You may solo them, I prefer them in a group.
Maybe this epidemic will help convince people to read those software licenses more carefully, but I am doubtful. Though after I explained to my mother what spyware was and she read the article the other day in the New York Times, she has told me she's going to be much more careful about what she downloads and runs, even if a friend recommends it.
Is there any centralized archive of malicious and/or spyware programs that surreptitiously modify users' computers or cause other undesired side effects and resist uninstallation? You know, something I could tell people like my mother to use to check out a piece of software to see if it's legitimate before they install it and cause a mess that somebody else has to fix? If not, there should be.
The ruling is not about popups.
The ruling is about software the user installed on his or her computer that creates popups.
I have to agree with the judge on this one, if a user installs something on thier own machine that interferes with a websites marketing, the owner of that website has no right to disable or to dictate how that software works.
If the user did not know what the software did, then the user should not have installed it.
And the user should be using Mozilla (or a derivative) anyway, with popups disabled.
Read, L
As soon as the adware marketing plan is fully legitimized, then there will be tons of things that include adware. All computers will come equipped from the manufacturer with adware installed.
imagine the day when ISPs begin maximizing their profits by piping ad information into your machine. I doubt that the judge (who I suspect will be justly compensated for his ruling) has a clue about what he is unleashing.
Speaking of adware, I installed mouse a month ago. The friggin mouse program had an adware component. It won't be just free ware and trojans. Adware and spyware will be in everything. There will be no consumer choice.
Remember to wipe when-u...