Congressional Anti-Spyware Bill Introduced
CRCates writes that U.S. "Senator Conrad Burns has introduced new anti-spyware legislation. The bill would make it difficult to for software to download and install itself without the user's knowledge. The bill would also require notification, consent, and procedures for easy removal."
Although I hate spyware as much as the next person, I am not so sure that the government should control it. The problem I see with the above is that it defines spyware more by the distribution method then the purpose.
I can definetely see a purpose for software to download updates, patches, etc automatically. Privacy concerns is what spyware is really about.
Off-topic, I admit, but there seem to be 2 more comments than are displayed here in this story. Where'd they go?
Spyware is a scourge, but how likely is it that this kind of weak-willed legislation will make spyware any better? Not likely, IMO. Not to mention that the law puts a muzzle on the 'free speech' of spyware authors, this law will probably go down in flames like all other anti-spam measures.
I have been pwned because my
Interesting point;
Although it's not spyware (afaik) many of those 'copy protected' CD's do install software without warning, for the sole purpose of interfering with the normal operation of the computer.
How the hell is this _NOT_ illegal already?!!
And why is nobody being prosecuted for it? There's no shortage of hard evidence.
455fe10422ca29c4933f95052b792ab2
Do the ActiveX controls that ask Y/N in IE count?
I use mozilla so that hardly bothers me, but a lot of people just assume that if a link (see AIM virii/trojans/"games" and the like) is sent to them, that the warning is part of the game?
Most activeX controls say 'I'd like to install something now...' and people just assume yes as the correct answer... They _do_ give consent, even if its kinda foolish to do so.
-- (appended to the end of comments you post, 120 chars)