Slashdot Mirror
Spyware Company Sues Utah Over Anti-Spyware Law
cgibby98 writes "An earlier Slashdot article talks about how web businesses oppose Utah's new spyware law. A story in Tuesday's Deseret Morning News says that WhenU.com filed suit Monday against the state, its governor, and attorney general, trying to keep the law from going into effect next month. The lawsuit claims the law violates WhenU's constitutionally-protected right to advertise."
The Supreme Court has ruled numerous times that commercial speech (advertising) can be restricted. It's not the same as political speech which gets a much higher level of protection.
I'm not familiar with WhenU's software, but I find this hard to believe
It is hard to believe, 'cause it isn't true. WhenU installs are also a pain in the arse to remove.
My dad recently downloaded some desktop weather software (though I'm not sure why he wants to know the weather of his desktop), and this junk installed with it. I tried to duplicate the problem by installing on another machine, and was never informed that it [whenu] was installing. Luckily i tried it on a test VM, so I didn't get the pleasure of uninstalling twice.
I just thought I'd share, so no one else has to waste their time looking for it. (I haven't read it yet, however)
Build it, and they will come^Hplain.
I was trying to see WhenU's side of the story by looking at . Unfortunately, when I tried to go there, my company popped up its standard "We can't let you see this web site" message. The blocking category? "Spyware". Apparenly the State of Utah is not the only group that classifies WhenU that way.
There's no point in questioning authority if you aren't going to listen to the answers.
If WhenU.com is unhappy about Utah law, I can only imagine how they will respond if either the proposed Software Principles Yielding Better Levels of Consumer Knowledge (SPYBLOCK) Act or the Controlling Invasive and Unauthorized Software Act is passed and signed into law.
These bills have been covered by:
PC World
InfoWorld
ComputerWorld, and
TechNewsWorld
Only Women Bleed (Sex, Sharia remix)
The most notable case is Central Hudson Gas & Electric v Public Service Commission, which resulted in the Central Hundson test:
Lawmakers that are anti-spyware would likely consider it deceptive.
Going to?
There are already enough weird laws on the books to do that. In one way or another, whether you know it or now, we're all criminals under some law in some way. It's just a matter of whether it's worth the effort to prosecute us. Tomorrow morning, you could awaken to find that you've pissed off some bureaucrat somewhere and find a zillion small fine notices in your mailbox for stuff people do everyday without a thought.
...and the Bill of Rights is directed at the government, not individuals.
Member of Orkut? Annoyed with spam?
Yep already happens for local calls at the airport if you look for the right phones. ( I lucked out at miami international )
I picked up the phone and it asked if I wanted to make a free local phone call ( up to 5 minutes ), so I listened to the advertising for something going on in miami, then it connected to the number i wanted.
onepoint
if you see me, smile and say hello.
Yes. However, WhenU is not splicing into anything. When installed, it clearly states it's being installed. You can choose not to complete the installation if you disagree with it. WhenU is not a viral spyware that hijacks anything. Let's not turn this into a witch hunt and sight "malicious" spyware as a cause to attack spyware that is installed due to ignorance.
Corporations ARE people. I won't blame you for not knowing this, since it happened way before you were born (SANTA CLARA COUNTY v. SOUTHERN PACIFIC RAILROAD COMPANY, 1886.) A clerk's misleading notes on this Supreme Court ruling were later used to support the notion of "corporate personhood."
You can read more about it here.
I did not become a vegetarian for my health, I did it for the health of the chickens. --Isaac Bashevis Singer