Slashdot Mirror
Top Web Businesses Oppose Utah Spyware Law
theodp writes "According to MediaPost.com: 'Some of the Web's leading content and technology providers have taken action to lobby against Utah's controversial Spyware Control Act, which is awaiting the governor's signature. Web publishers and businesses including AOL, Amazon, Cnet, eBay, Google, Microsoft, and Yahoo! signed a letter to the bill's sponsors arguing that the bill could create serious repercussions for the entire online community. The parties to the letter warned that the bill could interfere with computer security and would also impair the delivery of local, targeted ads'."
For example, the parties to the letter warned that the bill could interfere with computer security by preventing information technology and security companies from collecting data to analyze and prevent virus attacks, and would also impair the delivery of local, targeted ads.
If they are that concerned about security they could have AV companies include a [X] "Report viruses to Foo.com AV Central" option to eliminate that minor complaint and be compliant with the new law. As for targetted ads.. well, that's what they're really concerned about. It's a multi-million (billion?) dollar industry. Screaming about how bad the bill is for security is just a smoke and mirrors game.
I only hope that the spyware people don't go after the AdAware or Spybot Search & Destroy folks under the guise of the DMCA.
The way things today are going though..
Trolling is a art,
your "targeted ads" are going to be discarded because someone thinks they're spyware, maybe the ads should be re-thought?
There are four boxes used in defense of liberty: soap, ballot, jury, ammo. Use in that order.
Yep... this is an interesting problem. The bill says (1) A person may not:...
(c) use a context based triggering mechanism to display an advertisement that partially or wholly covers or obscures paid avertising or other content on an Internet website in a way that interferes with a user's ability to view the Internet website.
That could be read to say program that removes any part of the website from the user's view and replaces it with either something else or even plain nothingness is prohibited. So many non-spyware user-friendly uses of technology could get caught in the crossfire...
Criminey Sakes already!
* It's my computer, bought and paid for.
* It's my software, bought and paid for (and/or acquired free, legally).
* It's my bandwidth, bought and paid for (on a monthly basis).
Let me decide what to do with it.
If I want to load up my HD with bloatware, spyware, malware or whatever, as long as it harms no one else... who the hell cares?
If, on the other hand, I want to run my system cleanly, block out all malware sources with a HOSTS file, install anti-spyware and anti-virus software and do whatever else I see fit... again... who the hell cares?
It's my choice to run my computer and my software to twiddle my own bits as I damn well see fit.
If the government doesn't know anything about what the hell it is regulating, it out to stay the hell out of trying to do anything with it.
The problem with socialism is that they always run out of other people's money. - Margaret Thatcher
See, the problem is, Spyware jerks (like Gator) always CLAIM that what they are delivering is (a) with permission, (b) wanted, and (c) delivering some sort of benefit to the consumer.
And it takes a hell of a lot to debunk that.
The BIG one is to get shitholes like Gator to stop using "trickler" apps that reinstall the program if the user tries to remove it.