PC Pitstop Continues Anti-Spyware Campaign

Jason Spaceman points to this Globe and Mail story which begins "'Fresh from settling a libel lawsuit by pulling anti-Gator pages from its site, PC Pitstop this week plans to launch a new, expanded site critical of the controversial software.'" They're not giving up; according to this story, although Claria (nee Gator) is attempting to use such libel suits to stop critics from describing their spyware software (still called Gator) as "spyware," "To replace the material it removed in September, PC Pitstop on Thursday plans to launch its Gator Information Center -- which in many respects appears no less critical than its predecessor."

Comments

Not Spyware? Fine

[wowbagger]

OK, so Gator is saying:

Spyware is software installed without the users knowledge.

Our software is only installed with the user's knowledge.

Ergo, we are not spyware.


OK, so, define a new term:
Tattleware - software that reports your actions to a third party

Then use that term to describe Gator.

Additionally, it would seem to me that one could argue in court

You say your software is not spyware, since it is always installed with the user's permission. Fine - prove your assertion. We want a list of all computers with Gator on them, and proof that the users consented to the installation.

Re:Not Spyware? Fine

[mopslik]

Additionally, it would seem to me that one could argue in court, "You say your software is not spyware, since it is always installed with the user's permission. Fine - prove your assertion. We want a list of all computers with Gator on them, and proof that the users consented to the installation."

Only the way the justice system works is that the burden of proof lies with the prosecution, not the defendant. If you were launching a suit against Gator, you'd be required to "prove" that many users had their software installed without their knowledge/permission, rather than "prove" some users consented.

Having said that, I second the recommendation for a "tattleware" label.

Re:Not Spyware? Fine

[Anonymous Coward]

I would say that it's spyware, whether or not it is put on the user's machine with consent. It is a piece of software that phone's home to a central database, reporting the activities of the user on the machine it is installed on. That sounds like spy-work to me, regardless of how it got on the machine.

Re:Not Spyware? Fine

[meta-monkey]

I'm curious where they got this definition of "spyware." I had always thought that spyware was software that monitored what you do on your computer, and then reported that to other people. Sometimes, spyware is installed with consent. Sometimes, spyware is installed without consent. Either way, it's still spyware.

Gator's playing semantics. They don't seem to deny that their software monitors users' actions and reports them to their server. They're just trying to re-define the term so it only applies if it's consenusal. I call shennanigans.