Slashdot Mirror


Utah Sees First Spyware Case

denlin writes "According to a story at The Register: 'Overstock.com is set to become the first company to take action under Utah's new anti-spyware law. The company has filed a complaint against online retailer SmartBargains in the third district court in Salt Lake City. Utah's spyware law, the world's first, only made the statute book on 3 May. Utah is the only state with current spyware legislation, although California and Iowa are considering their own versions of the law.'"

123 comments

  1. This might work. by LPrime · · Score: 5, Interesting

    Patrick Byrne's comments regarding the hijacking of affiliate profits are dead on.

    I haven able to gather some interesting statistics about the "Parasitic" methods discussed in the article. The conversion of Visitors to Customer is about .2% of what you would normally get by traditional targeted banner advertising but the cost of the campaign is about 30% of the price. When you consider that in a commercial banner campaign your best hope is a 2% clickthrough (and even that is not that easy anymore) I can't see anyone except the ad companies making any money.

    In my humble experience the spyware companies and their affiliates target small startup companies luring them in with the cheap cost of getting new customers. Heck that's how they got me to spend 350$ on a campaign that ran on WhenU. For the money spend I received 0 Customers, 3 Complains and my CC being charged triple that took almost 30 days to resolve. But I receive at least 5 e-mails daily and at least 1 call per week from people advertising this exact same product.

    1. Re:This might work. by lothar97 · · Score: 4, Funny

      If you had spent $700, you could've had double the spam- and double all your returns (0 customers, 6 complaints, and 6 times the charges on your credit card). If it sounds too good to be true...

      --

    2. Re:This might work. by kunudo · · Score: 1

      So you admit to funding the spammers? Hmmm.... what an ...interesting thing to do.

    3. Re:This might work. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1, Insightful

      Yeah. Honest presentation of a learning experience. Who'd'a thunk it? The whole point of /. is to maintain your 733t image and karma.

    4. Re:This might work. by LPrime · · Score: 2, Interesting

      I fully admit it. As a matter of fact I did it just to see if there would be any ROI from it. After I realized that this is all a scam I never did it again, nor would I recommend anyone to do so. Like I said in my first post, they target small startups that have no Idea what they are doing with Internet Advertising.

    5. Re:This might work. by kunudo · · Score: 1

      The whole point of /. is to maintain your 733t image and karma.

      my teet image?

      seriously though, I don't like it when people give cash to people who use it to buy mailservers in china to flood inboxes and produce spyware that I usually get the task of removing from various family members' computers... but ok..

    6. Re:This might work. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Whoa. Sure you don't mean "1337"? You might as well have said "7347".

    7. Re:This might work. by frost22 · · Score: 1
      I fully admit it. As a matter of fact I did it just to see if there would be any ROI from it.
      Hmm.

      But what had you done if it did work ? The main gripe people have with this is that it is unethical - like paying a company that overpaint's ad süace others have rented on the street and put your ads there.

      Had you continued using that if it got you a good ROI ?
      --
      ...and here I stand, with all my lore, poor fool, no wiser than before.
    8. Re:This might work. by LPrime · · Score: 1

      A short answer would be Yes.

      A long answer would be Yes, if that method of advertising would not lower peoples oppinion of my company. I quickly realized that it would be dammaging to our reputation so we never tried it again. Like I said in my previous post, alot of small companies are coned into this type of advertising because they don't know what they are getting into. I did not know all the facts at that time. I get offers like these once or twise a week and I always turn them down, no matter the potential. And belive me, there is a lot of pottential.

  2. Mad Utah Props by WwWonka · · Score: 3, Funny

    You go Utah!!!

    I'm getting sick and tired of low life no morals spyware companies knowing what me and my 5 wives are browsing on the internet!

    1. Re:Mad Utah Props by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Flamebait

    2. Re:Mad Utah Props by cshark · · Score: 1

      This is great. I wonder if the law will hold up in court. These are exciting times. No precidents for any of this.

      --

      This signature has Super Cow Powers

    3. Re:Mad Utah Props by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      If your going to make mean and unfair digs at Utah, at least hit them for SCO.

    4. Re:Mad Utah Props by wash23 · · Score: 1

      Yeah, go Utah! ;)

    5. Re:Mad Utah Props by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      offtopic.

    6. Re:Mad Utah Props by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      overrated

    7. Re:Mad Utah Props by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Troll

    8. Re:Mad Utah Props by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      What will Utah outlaw next? Darl, perhaps?

      Or wouldn't they want to get rid of their most famous current resident (barring the Roswell aliens ;) ?

  3. I wonder... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    what Bonzi Buddy wouolld have to say about that!

    1. Re:I wonder... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      BB: "Utah makes baby jesus cry."

  4. I think I speak for all of us... by James+A.+R.+Joyce · · Score: 0, Insightful

    ...when I say that it's about tupping time . I just hope that they can't wriggle their way out of it with an appeal.

  5. This will be interesting... by Dozix007 · · Score: 5, Insightful

    I wonder if they will actually get anywhere. While Spyware is annoying and intrusive, the people who put it on your computer are generally in the right by their agreements. Most people that get spyware are uninformed, and ignorant. If you open unsolisited email, or if you download P2P, and other such software, you will end up with spyware.

    1. Re:This will be interesting... by lothar97 · · Score: 2, Funny

      I remember the good ol' days before spyware: it was always took a little work to fix the PCs of friends. Now it's quite easy- just run AdAware and everything's fixed!

      --

    2. Re:This will be interesting... by agm · · Score: 2, Interesting

      That all depends on what operating system you use.

    3. Re:This will be interesting... by lakeesis · · Score: 5, Informative
      The only problem is that some of the ignorant masses don't actually download the programs causing the banner ads -- they get webjacked into doing so.

      Though the "software license agreements" that most adware pushers have people page through seemingly give them the right do produce the pop up ads, this particular lawsuit addresses the end result -- the software equivalent of hiring someone to wear a billboard for your store to stand in the doorway of your nearest competition. Your hireling wouldn't necessarily prevent them from going in, but it annoys the heck out of the consumer, and infringes on the space of your competition.

      --

      sig: I'm not here right now, or busy. Please leave new sig after the tone.

      --
      sig: I'm not at home, or busy. please leave new sig after the tone.
    4. Re:This will be interesting... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 3, Insightful
      the people who put it on your computer are generally in the right by their agreements. Most people that get spyware are uninformed, and ignorant.

      You can't make a legal contract if you are uniformed or ignorant. This is why shrinkwrap license are rarely (ever?) held up in court.

    5. Re:This will be interesting... by Jaysyn · · Score: 5, Informative

      A friend of mine ran Adaware last night & it found 2 tracking cookies, not a huge deal. I tell her to download Spybot & run it, and she found *118* more spyware related files. The moral of the story is use em both if you want to be sure you're clean.

      Jaysyn

      --
      There is a war going on for your mind.
    6. Re:This will be interesting... by IdleTime · · Score: 2, Funny

      SpyWare?

      Is that a feature of MS Windows? I can't say I have seen anything like it on my PC...

      --
      If you mod me down, I *will* introduce you to my sister!
    7. Re:This will be interesting... by devilspgd · · Score: 2, Insightful

      No, nothing Windows-specific about spyware, other then the fact that the vast majority of idiots who are willing to install spyware happen to use Windows.

      If you're willing to download and install Bonzai Buddy or anything similar, you'll do it in your operating system of choice.

      If Linux ever gets a foothold into the desktop market place, you'll see spyware popping up there too

      --
      Give a man a fish, he'll eat for a day, but teach a man to phish...
    8. Re:This will be interesting... by Nefarious+Wheel · · Score: 3, Interesting

      Agreed. I once sent a less than lauditory note to the LOP people who had installed their doubly-distilled, quadruply qualified and unmentionable (so ok, I read Doc Smith!) toolbar on my daughter's browser. Their response was "you agreed to it". Where? When? At no point did she click on a link that clearly indicated this would happen. Hate LOP. Hate, hate hate hate.

      --
      Do not mock my vision of impractical footwear
    9. Re:This will be interesting... by Bull999999 · · Score: 2, Interesting

      Some of those spy/adwares download themselves by minicking Windows message boxes, which I believe comes pretty darn close to fruad.

      I actually seen one case where an IE window set to hide everything with the background color of blue opens up to make it look like you are experiencing BSOD. It also brings up another pop up window with a message in tune of "something is wrong with your computer and click on "Ok" to download a software to fix it". It looked like a real deal execpt for the fact that the popup window had the IE banner on it.

      --
      1f u c4n r34d th1s u r34lly n33d t0 g37 l41d
    10. Re:This will be interesting... by TykeClone · · Score: 2, Insightful

      Anything that tries to trick a user into downloading and installing it is crap and shouldn't be tolerated.

      --
      A fine is a tax you pay for doing wrong and a tax is a fine you pay for doing all right.
    11. Re:This will be interesting... by TykeClone · · Score: 2, Informative
      I'm working on a machine and ran Spybot first and killed a bunch of stuff. Then I ran AdAware and it found 2 bad running processes that SpyBot didn't kill.

      I agree that both must be used to catch everything - and the corallary - Run both on all of the user profiles on a given machine

      --
      A fine is a tax you pay for doing wrong and a tax is a fine you pay for doing all right.
    12. Re:This will be interesting... by WuphonsReach · · Score: 1

      so ok, I read Doc Smith!

      Damm, another fan of E. E. "Doc" Smith.

      I think it's time to dig that series out again... was good up until the last book where everything got all metaphysical. High-brow sci-fi it ain't, but still a good space opera read.

      --
      Wolde you bothe eate your cake, and have your cake?
    13. Re:This will be interesting... by MysteriousPreacher · · Score: 1

      Being ignorant isn't a defence. being uninformed isn't a defence either unless you can prove that the people presenting the contract didn't meet their legal obligations to inform you of the consequences. For example, investments may decrease and you may get back less than you invested.

      The term you're looking for is 'capacity to contract'. I could sign a contract and be released from it if it's proven that I didn't have 'capacity to contract'. This defence might be used if I were mentally ill or under age.

      Shrinkwrap licences are legally flimsy for other reasons. I'm not a lawyer but I do get a lot of adverts for credit cards.

      --
      -- Using the preview button since 2005
  6. PLEASE I BEG! by MrRuslan · · Score: 0, Redundant

    Sue Bonzi Buddy plz SUE that purple monkey out of this world to make it a better place!

    1. Re:PLEASE I BEG! by MrRuslan · · Score: 0, Offtopic

      If I say SCO is behind it will you sue then? :P I know im gonna burn for this LoL.

    2. Re:PLEASE I BEG! by MrRuslan · · Score: 0, Offtopic

      Hehe peace of garbage...

  7. Proliferation of stupid *ware invented words by Marxist+Hacker+42 · · Score: 4, Interesting

    From the article: Patrick Byrne, president of Overstock said: "Pop-up ads have been to Web browsing what spam is to email. Within the world of affiliate marketing, such software is often called 'parasiteware' on the grounds that the companies which distribute such code and those who advertise through it are parasitic on legitimate commerce: spyware hijacks not only consumer spending, but the commissions that would otherwise be paid to legitimate affiliate community"

    Ok, I get the idea that spyware is parasitic- but do we really need the cobbled together "parasiteware" to describe it?

    --
    SJW: a person who perceives an injustice, and while correcting it, commits a greater injustice.
    1. Re:Proliferation of stupid *ware invented words by chachob · · Score: 2, Informative

      and that isnt the worst of them! check out this little "dictionary" of -ware terms...

    2. Re:Proliferation of stupid *ware invented words by offpath3 · · Score: 2, Funny
      Proliferation of stupid *ware

      Stupidware... Just one more word for the list.

    3. Re:Proliferation of stupid *ware invented words by Nivag353 · · Score: 1

      Hmm...

      You seem to have a few problems....

      isnt should be spelt isn't

      otherwise your sentence is perfect, no one should quible over not starting a sentence with a capital, grammatically inconsistencies, or spellling

      What have you done with my dried frog pills?????

      You're using my IP without permission, I'm going to sue, Sue, SUE!!!!!!!!


      -Nivag

  8. A question by neilcSD · · Score: 5, Insightful

    Here's what I have always wondered - why do merchants say the 1st amendment protect intrusive advertising? Seems to me that if someone doesn't want to hear it, they shouldn't be forced to. Faxers, spammers, all try to hind behind the constitution. I thought the First Amendment only protects free speech, it does not guarantee an audience. Also, it really isn't free speech if it costs people something is it (bandwidth, etc)?

    1. Re:A question by chachob · · Score: 2, Interesting

      perfect example of "fax spamming" was discussed in a previous article

    2. Re:A question by dbc · · Score: 4, Informative

      well, yes. and in fact the 1st A. gives broad protections mainly to political speech. you can stand in the park a rail against the mayor all you like. but the protections for commercial speech are *much* more narrow. and yes, forcing you to pay for them to advertise to you is not protected by the 1st A.

    3. Re:A question by register_ax · · Score: 4, Interesting
      Seems to me that if someone doesn't want to hear it, they shouldn't be forced to.

      Also, it really isn't free speech if it costs people something is it (bandwidth, etc)?

      True overall, but everything costs someone something. Especially in the day in age where time is just as precious (if not more so) as the green that comes in. Taking a protest to the streets corridors off that section of pavement that you have paid for and costs someone time in detouring. But the issue gets mucky as this is also right to assembly. Now if we detract time altogether and only demand it to be a tangible product, we might see how we might be able to beat 'round this African lilac and escape the issue entirely. Ah, if only simplicity existed and people could show compassion and patience for another. But no, it is about your rights, and your rights require to interfere with other's rights. It just isn't as pen and paper write the laws, which is also why you see an influx of laws and the practice of law in the day in age.

      Recently I was reading a press release on some big item having to do with copyright or the like, and one notable CEO or another said that since there are no laws that exist saying you explicitly can, it means you are not able to (sorry, I can't remember where or who, you'll have to take my word for it :)). So if it is not explicitly written they were saying, there's no rights saying you necessarily can do it. I found that highly repulsive as I figured laws existed as restrictions, not being a mode of checking whether or not you can brush your teeth with so and so toothpaste. Extreme I know, but this has everything to do with freedom of speech. OK, maybe I'm pulling freedom of speech into freedom of use, but I think a slow integration of the two is on the rise, where it becomes impossible to even discuss the technology being used as can be readily seen within this era of the DMCA. Companies wish to do away with these rights because it makes everything a lot easier on them ... no lawsuits for poor products, only being able to be enforced by the government that "works" for the people.

      It's a quiet emergence I fear the majority is not ready for. But then I can also readily see they will never be ready for it. Interesting to see how things will turn out regardless.

    4. Re:A question by BCW2 · · Score: 1

      In America it goes, "if it's not expressly forbidden, it's ok to do it". The other way is very police state, like the bad old days of Moscow.
      As for the first amendment, it has nothing to do with advertising. If someone knocks on my door and refuses to leave, I have them arrested for tresspass. If they stand in the street yelling their spiel, they get arrested for disturbing the peace. There are NO first amendment rights to advertise!

      --
      Professional Politicians are not the solution, they ARE the problem.
    5. Re:A question by register_ax · · Score: 1
      I know that there are "NO first amendment rights to advertise" as I am an educated USAian. However when you say "if it's not expressly forbidden, it's ok to do it" sounds more like Amsterdam to be honest. I know I still have this underlying right of freedom and will do my best to ensure it stays this way. But with million dollar arguments flying left and right spreading dee FUD into our culture without a basis to stand makes it seem as though more things are forbidden than is apparent. What's more is that I realize the documents we base our lives off is possible of change, and it is this possibility of change which I am concerning myself with.

      I am smart enough to realize what I am and am not able to do. I've read the constitution et al, but I do recognize there exists an even larger body of people who have never read their constitution. They have no idea what their rights are whatsoever. I believe that with the diminishing of knowledge and a person's lacking of desire to learn, say from books published from Yale, Harvard, NYU, Princeton etc instead of the teevee, we're falling ever further behind. There is a way to gain power as it has happened again and again throughout history as one civilization fell and another rose to take its place. I'm not exactly thinking the US will keel over tomorrow, but I think situations will exist that will make that easier to happen within future generations. Perhaps this is a good thing, but I am naive and think change can be brought about by maintaining that ability through "uncontrol." I think maintaining that hold and resiliency strong is an imperative goal that must be brought forth at all costs.

      The Uniting and Strengthening America by Providing Appropriate Tools Required to Intercept and Obstruct Terrorism (USA PATRIOT ACT) and the USA PATRIOT ACT 2, the DMCA, the increased lawsuits and issued patents, and subjects of intellectual property and copyright all ring loudly in my ears. Thomas Jefferson was an ardent supporter of a decentralized government, but the battle was run out even from the beginning. Corporations existed on monopolistic scales although there were only a few of them. These were everyday products as well, something like how computers once were not but became to be. It's been an interesting road paved, but I think there should be a push back into decentralized system. I am incredibly interested in law and am not so naive to see that this is merely the "enforcing" of justice. That's a copout for all I'm concerned, as law has merit, but not when it is used uncredulously.

    6. Re:A question by snyps · · Score: 2, Funny

      freedom of speach is not nearly what people say it is, if you go infront of the whitehouse and start badmouthing bush, then you will most likely be arrested. There are enough holes in the 1st amendment that you could fit an elephant through (accusation intended).

    7. Re:A question by cpt+kangarooski · · Score: 4, Informative

      I know that there are "NO first amendment rights to advertise" as I am an educated USAian.

      I don't think you're even slightly well-educated:

      "The First Amendment, as applied to the States through the Fourteenth Amendment, protects commercial speech from unwarranted governmental regulation." Central Hudson Gas & Electric Corp. v. Public Service Commission of New York, 447 U.S. 557 (1980).

      However when you say "if it's not expressly forbidden, it's ok to do it" sounds more like Amsterdam to be honest.

      Nope -- that's the English tradition.

      --
      -- This and all my posts are in the public domain. I am a lawyer. I am not your lawyer, and this is not legal advice.
    8. Re:A question by cft_128 · · Score: 3, Informative
      why do merchants say the 1st amendment protect intrusive advertising?

      I posted something in another thread that was related to this.

      Part of it boils down to an unexplained aside in an 1886 Supreme Court ruling that grants corporations 14th amendment rights. This has been used to imply that corporations are 'citizens' and deserve the other rights too.

      Also, it really isn't free speech if it costs people something is it (bandwidth, etc)?

      I think you hit the nail on the head there - their right to freedom of speech does not grant them the right to use *your* private facilities to do it.

      "I hope we shall crush in its birth the aristocracy of our moneyed corporations which dare already to challenge our government in a trial of strength, and bid defiance to the laws of our country." -Thomas Jefferson

      --

      Underloved Movies and Pub Quiz: donotquestionme.org

    9. Re:A question by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      "Amsterdam..." "Nope--that's the English tradition."

      Futhermore, if its Amsterdam tradition one SHOULD expect it to ALSO be English tradition as thats where the Angles and Saxons came from. To this day, there is a clear continuous dialect divergence as one goes from London to Berlin, with Amsterdam talk sounding half English and half German. English is a GERMANIC language. Customs and language and race move togerther as a people migrate.

    10. Re:A question by 4of12 · · Score: 1

      ..gives broad protections mainly to political speech...but the protections for commercial speech are *much* more narrow.

      Ah, but wouldn't it be nice if there were such a clear distinction that could be made between commerce and politics.

      Separation of church and state took some time, but has been beneficial for both, IMHO.

      Separation of money and state will take some doing.

      --
      "Provided by the management for your protection."
  9. Quite the law by bcore · · Score: 4, Informative

    The article is a bit sparse on detail, but here's a link I dug up: Link.

    Quite law, that. I wonder if it will work?

  10. Re:Gmail invite please? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Why not just drop a few quads and imagine the Gmail?

  11. Hooray for Iowa by autopr0n · · Score: 3, Insightful

    IA was one of the few states that had an anti-spam law on the books before the federal government stepped in and fucked everything up with there idiotic (yes you) CAN-SPAM act.

    Hopefully more states will follow suit and things can quiet down for a while before the Fed steps in and legalizes it.

    --
    autopr0n is like, down and stuff.
    1. Re:Hooray for Iowa by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0
      with there idiotic...

      Oh the irony.

    2. Re:Hooray for Iowa by TykeClone · · Score: 1

      All the Iowa law was good for was for our Attorney General to get face time on TV. He's never met a class action law suit that he didn't jump on (Microsoft, tobacco, ...) - he appears to mainly want to be seen doing something as opposed to doing something worthwhile like stomping on METH.

      --
      A fine is a tax you pay for doing wrong and a tax is a fine you pay for doing all right.
    3. Re:Hooray for Iowa by bmongar · · Score: 1

      They were also one of the first states to pass anti-UCITA laws. Iowa despite it's farm image is a technologicaly aware state.

      --
      As x approaches total apathy I couldn't care less.
  12. OT: Andy by xanadu-xtroot.com · · Score: 0, Offtopic

    Can someone verify or debunk this? It seems Andy Kaufman may really be alive.

    --
    I'm not a prophet or a stone-age man,
    I'm just a mortal with potential of a super man.
    1. Re:OT: Andy by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      bullshit publicity stunt. The Yahoo article is a press release for this hoaxster's blog (on blogspot).

    2. Re:OT: Andy by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I don't care.

      If Andy Kaufman is alive, it makes no diffrence in my life. I wasn't a fan of him when he was alive, and i'm no more a fan of him since Man on the Moon. If he is alive then great, he'll be dead soon anyway and the world can move on.

  13. not in the right anymore by r00t · · Score: 5, Insightful

    Spyware authors may have been "in the right"
    prior to this law. Why do you think the law
    was passed? :-) An EULA contract is nothing
    when it goes against the law.

  14. glad to hear it by Rick+and+Roll · · Score: 5, Interesting
    I am glad to hear that the state of Utah has an anti-spyware law. I would like to see my own neighboring state, Arizona, get one.

    I run linux and have never had to deal with spyware or adware on my own computer (though I hear one company is using .xpi to add a "search bar" to Mozilla). My parents, however, run Windows. My little sister installs programs from cereal boxes that are full of spyware, and I swear one of those programs caused porn pop-ups to be displayed on my computer.

    So what I'm getting at, is that spyware is a huge problem and it's long time someone did something about it! It's just a pity that there hasn't been a government agency or a court brave enough to bring a big judgement against the industry. The fact of the matter is, these programs vandalize people's systems. They are a form of property damage. Plus they expose people to pornographic ads. They break so many laws already. It is too bad that there has to be legislation before someone can make them pay.

  15. While they are filing suit... by jwcorder · · Score: 5, Informative

    I want to get on the band wagon and file a suit against Overstock.com! I bought one thing from them and I have been getting bombarded with emails sometimes two or three times a day.

    I even tried to opt out of their email list and the onslaught continues. So before they start sueing people they need to examine their in house activites.

    --
    http://jayceecorder.blogspot.com
    1. Re:While they are filing suit... by August_zero · · Score: 1

      THis really is a (rare) case where Hotmail is your friend.

      If I need to register for a website or anything that I suspect will result in a spam torrent, I hop over to hotmail, make a new account and within seconds I have a legit email that I can use for the registration and promptly forget about. I am probably commiting fraud by doing this but white collar prison vs spam is not a difficult choice to make.

      --
      On Wall Street they say "buy low, sell high" On the pad we say, "buy high, sell high" Isn't that somehow better?
    2. Re:While they are filing suit... by jwcorder · · Score: 3, Interesting
      That's the same strategy I use for everything. Even this slashdot account is on my hotmail. Once a week, I log in to it and delete all the email so they don't shut the account down.

      I don't give my real email address out to anyone other then bill companies (utilities, mortgage, student loans) and my family.

      It is this reasoning that keeps me from getting any spam what so every on my work or home email addresses.

      The only accounts I have spam issues with are my webmaster@domain.com addresses that I have for the four or five sites that I admin. Those poor bastards get a large treatment from Cloudmark's Spamnet utility located at www.cloudmark.com.(Excuse me for not linking it, I am just lazy)

      --
      http://jayceecorder.blogspot.com
    3. Re:While they are filing suit... by KrispyKringle · · Score: 4, Interesting
      Better yet, check out SpamGourmet. I've seen a few other services come close, but this is the only one I know of that allows you the flexibility to create disposable addresses without logging on (e.g. while standing in line at the cellular phone counter) and restrict what addresses can be created to prevent enterprising spammers from just creating new addresses for you.

      You go there and register a name (say, august_zero@spamgourmet.com). Then, whenever you have to give out a displosable address, you make it string.n.august_zero@spamgourmet.com, where string is some unique string you'll use to remember this address and n is an integer ST 1 Far easier.

    4. Re:While they are filing suit... by jwcorder · · Score: 1

      Karma me to death if you wish, but I don't see how that is easier then one hotmail account that never changes and a decent spam utility. That's IMO only though.

      --
      http://jayceecorder.blogspot.com
    5. Re:While they are filing suit... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      The Utah law doesn't restrict spam, just spyware. The Feds have effectively blocked states from restricting spam, so you've got your work cut out for you if you really want to file suit against Overstock.

    6. Re:While they are filing suit... by Flatline_hun · · Score: 1

      Don't you know mailinator.com? Instant e-mail address without registration. You just give me@mailinator.com as required e-mail, and after that you can check you inbox...

      --
      Yeah, free Ipod! He is innocent!
    7. Re:While they are filing suit... by darkstream · · Score: 1
      My problem with this method (I use it too, but with a yahoo address) is Windows users and Windows viruses. I work on a Mac and am immune to all Outlook Express email viruses. However, user spam is still a problem. Idiot family members and friends have continued to bulk mail me moronic massforwards over the years. I complain and complain that they shouldn't share my address in the to: field with others I don't know, but they don't get it. I haven't received any dancing leprechaun emails in a while, but now some chump using Adelphia in Philidelphia is spamming me with Windows viruses. I don't know who it is. He's behind a cable firewall. I don't know anybody in PA. The only way he got my email address is by receiving the same massforward as I did, probably months ago - long deleted.

      Adelphia doesn't respond to email. So I have to block this guy's dynamic IP address every few weeks when Adelphia changes it. But I now receive spam at my personal address after being clean for eight years. He's obviously spamming other dumb Windows users as well with my address and now the junk is starting to roll in. My address is out in the wild. :( Eight years without spam is pretty lucky, so I'm thankful, but I'd rather still not be getting spam.

      Protecting your address relies on trusting the people you share it with to not get email viruses. Or to be Mac or *nix users. LOL Maybe I should make a new address and only share it with people willing to sign a contract that they won't use Outlook Express. :/

      --
      Fun with Inkwell | www.coo
  16. the wrong direction by Wellmont · · Score: 4, Interesting

    Doesn't anyone think these should be class action lawsuits started by consumers rather then competitors? This just leaves too much room for overstock to declair advertising practices of their competitor unlawful just to get them out of the picture, not to champion the rights of online consumers. This is almost as corrupt as the idea of Spyware, addware in general! The two cases that have been posted on Slash dot within the last week have been both started by companies who are in direct competition with the plaintifs. This doesn't seem like a revolution where the consumer is taking back his right to accept or reject advertisements it more or less seems like a great way to get rid of competitors who had to resort to unaccepted advertisement methods in order to get an edge on the monopolistic front runner!

    1. Re:the wrong direction by TykeClone · · Score: 1
      The competitors are the only ones "harmed" by the popups (discounting that fact that some POS software was generating them).

      Consumers would need to sue for unauthorized use of their systems or something along those lines.

      --
      A fine is a tax you pay for doing wrong and a tax is a fine you pay for doing all right.
    2. Re:the wrong direction by c+era · · Score: 2, Insightful

      Actually, overstock.com does have legal grounds to sue. Here's the prohibited conduct part of the law:

      13-39-201. Prohibited conduct.
      (1) A person may not:
      (a) install spyware on another person's computer;
      (b) cause spyware to be installed on another person's computer; or
      (c) use a context based triggering mechanism to display an advertisement that partially or wholly covers or obscures paid advertising or other content on an Internet website in a way that interferes with a user's ability to view the Internet website.
      (2) It is not a defense to a violation of this section that a user may remove or hide an advertisement.

      What overstock.com is sueing over is section 1.C & 2. We're talking about adds that goto a compeditor from their site. The thing with these pop-ups, is that they present a deal that looks like it could be from overstock.com and when the user click on it, they goto SmartBargains instead.

      Think of this along the lines of Wal*Mart paying someone to put a posterboard with Wal*Mart advertisements on it, and go into near by Target stores and tell Target's customers to goto Wal*Mart instead. Who's the one doing the unethical advertisement?

  17. How is this the first? by Zen · · Score: 2, Insightful

    Maybe LL Bean should have filed suit in Utah instead of in Maine? Yes, it's different because this one will test Utah's new law. But this sounds like exactly the same problem, and since the story's short on details, it could even be the same culprit (claria).

  18. NONSENSE by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    If you're ignorant, and someone pushes a big knife in your back, then that is the ignorant person's fault by your reasoning, not the stabber?

    GET REAL ASSHOLE - you don't know anymore what is right and what is wrong.

    1. Re:NONSENSE by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0
      GET REAL ASSHOLE

      What is that? Spam? I gotta tell ya, it doesn't sound like a very good product.

  19. Try this scenario... by Duhavid · · Score: 3, Interesting

    I let my son use my wife's computor to go look up airplane pictures. He is 11, is beginning to learn how to use a browser and search engines. So, I figure OK, let him learn. Well, what happens when he accidently clicks on a web page that has one of the "do you want to install" things on it? This is not unsolicted email, not p2p. And these sites are such that you cant tell you are going to get the treatment until *after* you have clicked the link.

    OK, I can tell him to always click no. But they word the text such that persons of average adult learning and intelligence think that saying yes is a good thing. So what is an 11 year old going to do? And how about if it is one of those sites that continually brings the "do you want to install" prompt back up if you answer "no". Try it sometime, it is not fun for me. He is going to get fed up and answer yes ( which is exactly what they want... ).

    I think that "pure software" act I saw here on /. was right on for this problem.

    --
    emt 377 emt 4
    1. Re:Try this scenario... by Dozix007 · · Score: 1

      Well... education is the best tool. Teach your son how to avoid such sites. Generally they are worthless and ad filled. Education, not ignorance is the best policy ;)

    2. Re:Try this scenario... by Duhavid · · Score: 1

      I have stumbled on them myself from time to time. I dont know how to avoid them completely myself. Do you? If so, how?

      --
      emt 377 emt 4
    3. Re:Try this scenario... by rebel47 · · Score: 1

      First thing to do is stop using IE as your browser. Use Firefox or Netscape 7.1 and set it to block unrequested pop ups. Perfect? No but it kills about 99% of those damm pop-ups. Download and install Spybot and AdAware and run them on start up and that will prevent most of the scum sucking adware from infecting your PC. Also check out Pest Patrol from ZoneLabs.

      --
      One day I woke up and saw all my rights had disappeared, that's the day I knew the terrorists had won.
    4. Re:Try this scenario... by Duhavid · · Score: 1

      Thanks!

      --
      emt 377 emt 4
  20. Gee by BCW2 · · Score: 0, Flamebait

    When I saw the words lawsuit and Utah together I expected the worst. Why is it hard to contemplate any good from a lawsuit in Utah? Or at least anthing good happening fast, like in my lifetime.

    --
    Professional Politicians are not the solution, they ARE the problem.
    1. Re:Gee by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0
      • Why is it hard to contemplate any good from a lawsuit in Utah?
      Because Orrin Hatch represents Utah? (You might know me from such films as 'I'll fry your hardware with a P2P virus', 'Giving the porn industry the keys to the DOJ', or 'I wrote the DMCA') I don't get it, is this a rhetorical question?
    2. Re:Gee by BCW2 · · Score: 1

      Think about SCO and it's variants (Red Hat, Novell) clogging the courts there. It's been over a year and the obvious good still hasn't happened.

      And yes I think Hatch is dangerous. He's an honest politician, by LBJ's definition: "once he's bought, he stays bought", by the MPAA, and RIAA.

      --
      Professional Politicians are not the solution, they ARE the problem.
    3. Re:Gee by BCW2 · · Score: 0, Flamebait

      I see my biggest fan came by two days later with his mod points.

      Do you have a clue what sarcasm is?

      Dumbass

      --
      Professional Politicians are not the solution, they ARE the problem.
    4. Re:Gee by BCW2 · · Score: 0, Flamebait

      I really wish I could understand this clowns problem. This is the only person that consistantly nails me. It seems to follow the mod points cycle, so I pretty much know when it's comming and write something just for this clown.

      Another confused liberal, there's only two things you can do to them:
      1. kick the bejeesus out of them.
      2. give them a big enough raise to make them conservative.

      --
      Professional Politicians are not the solution, they ARE the problem.
  21. mod parent down as TROLL please by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Every time a Utah story is posted, someone thinks they are funny by talking about multiple wives. But they aren't, neither are they informed.

    1. Re:mod parent down as TROLL please by MoronGames · · Score: 1

      Maybe they're fundamentalist.

      --
      hey!
  22. The feds will fix it. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    I suppose this means we can look forward to the UCANSPY act.

  23. I can see a reason. by gd2shoe · · Score: 1


    I can see two actually. One, you aren't violating the terms of service (If you were to make multiple hotmail accounts. Not your point, but it was his.) (and yes, hotmail and yahoo have both gotten much better lately.)

    The second, you can tell who is selling/mishandling email addresses. If you register for a site with one of these, and then you decide you actually want to use the service longterm, you can be alerted to the possibility of letting one of your real addresses out into the wild.

    (disclaimer: I've never used this service. I just think I see where the poster was going with this.)

    --
    I won't join Slashcott. OTOH, If Beta goes live, I just won't be back until it's fixed. Sorry Dice.
    1. Re:I can see a reason. by KrispyKringle · · Score: 1
      That's exactly where I was going. Guess I didn't make it real clear; thanks for clearing it up for me :)

      I used to do the disposable hotmail thing, too, but having multiple accounts is a real hassle. Multiple logins, passwords...it's irritating. Here, they all go straight to my real address, but as soon as one starts sending spam, I terminate it. And I can still recieve the legit mail from the others, something the hotmail method doesn't really allow for (you either use the same address for all spam--meaning to get the legit messages from the mix you still have to sort through spam, making it little better than a box for urgent personal messages and a box for the rest--or you have to create a new address each time you give it out).

      Spamgourmet rules. You should give it a shot (in all honesty, though, I don't get much spam from the people I do give my spamgourmet addresses to. I rarely have to terminate an address. Most if it really is legit opt-out kinda stuff, which leads me to think spammers get our addresses less from sleazy companies and more from web harvesting, mailing lists, etc, something I'm careful to keep my address off of).

  24. Legal virusus by scifiber_phil · · Score: 3, Insightful

    Spy ware is nothing but legal virusus in my book. Some legal mumbo-jumbo in a EULA saying that I agree to allow you to install third party crap that does god knows what is just unethical and should be illegal. The fact that most of this stuff then ferments to a greater level of scum by spying on me etc. just adds to the insult. NOONE would knowingly agree to ANY of the things, if the EULA were actually truthful about all the effects of clicking on the "I Agree" button. The social engineering done by the lawyers in these EULAs is no differrent then the social enginneering in an email getting someone to open an attachment. The results, in my book are the same. Now I've got a virus on my machine. Both should be equally illegal.

    1. Re:Legal virusus by TykeClone · · Score: 2, Interesting

      Anything that requires a third party application to remove is a virus (OS notwithstanding)

      --
      A fine is a tax you pay for doing wrong and a tax is a fine you pay for doing all right.
    2. Re:Legal virusus by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Anything that requires a third party application to remove is a virus (OS notwithstanding)

      Internet Explorer? Hmm... maybe you're right at that.

  25. Woo hoo!! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    I live in Utah and I didn't even know we HAD a spyware law!! Thank you slashdot!!!

  26. Yay for completely unrealated situations... by Dozix007 · · Score: 1

    I don't recall anyone ever being given the option of being stabbed and saying yes. If you are ignorant enough to say yes to a stabbing, then you have some other issues. I advocate education over ignorance my friend.

  27. Spyware can be a good thing by Skraut · · Score: 4, Funny
    Yesterday my boss got his first batch of spyware. When I explained to him what it was and why it needed to be removed he started getting paranoid thinking everyone was tracking him.


    He asked me "Why don't you ever have to deal with this crap on your system?"

    I dropped a knoppix cd on his desk and simply said "Linux."

    --
    Introducing Microsoft Vacuum 1.0 The first Microsoft product that doesn't suck.
    1. Re:Spyware can be a good thing by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Original poster neglected to mention he then got fired for being a suspected communist.

    2. Re:Spyware can be a good thing by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      He asked me "Why don't you ever have to deal with this crap on your system?"

      I dropped a knoppix cd on his desk and simply said "Linux."


      At that instant, he was enlightened.

  28. SCOware! by cliffy2000 · · Score: 0, Flamebait

    Utah: the double-edged sword.
    They criminalize Spyware. Yay!
    They give birth to SCOware. Boo!

  29. That's nothing by Theatetus · · Score: 1

    There's a really great/awful "Citibank" scam that javascripts images that mimick the address bar and secure status bar, plus javascripting a fake verisign popup. It took netstat'ing to convince a coworker it was fake.

    None of this particularly makes me regret running Linux, personally...

    --
    All's true that is mistrusted
    1. Re:That's nothing by ngoy · · Score: 1
      There's a really great/awful "Citibank" scam that javascripts images that mimick the address bar and secure status bar, plus javascripting a fake verisign popup. It took netstat'ing to convince a coworker it was fake.


      I saw that too on some email my wife got. I prompty rewrote my automated form filler to create checksum valid credit cards and submitted about 10000 of them. My only problem is that it is in .Net so not to portable, and need the .net framework installed. Sorry, too lazy to learn Java and figure out how to do it in a .js file.
      --
      --ngoy
  30. They're not convicted yet... by gd2shoe · · Score: 1

    ...so please hold that thougth!

    --
    I won't join Slashcott. OTOH, If Beta goes live, I just won't be back until it's fixed. Sorry Dice.
  31. No by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Then you must be the only one on the planet who always completely reads all legal agreements in all software that he downloads. That is what you are saying - all people do that... In reality nobody does that. So that invalidates your reasoning.

    Yawn.

  32. Riiight... by Dozix007 · · Score: 1

    Okay, I really hate flambaint annoying posting, but this is an exception. You don't have to read EULA to figure out that it is adaware. Use some common sense !! It does not take a genious to find these things out. At the very least, run some sort of adaware like program to get rid of spyware.

    1. Re:Riiight... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      You've got no new argument. You lost.

      Yawn.

  33. Don't stop there... by r_j_prahad · · Score: 3, Informative

    After Adaware and Spybot pronounced my wife's PC clean, it still appeared to have problems. So I ran Moosoft's "The Cleaner" and found nine more Trojans.

    The moral of this extended story is: don't stop at one or maybe even two spyware-adware removers. Malware is clever and insidious and needs to be treated with a "cocktail" mix of software antibiotics.

  34. PEACE OFFERING - Re:While they are filing suit... by jonfullmer · · Score: 5, Informative

    Hello, jwcorder. I'm the Senior Network Engineer at Overstock.com. I was sorry to hear that you're having trouble unsubscribing from our emailing lists. We are continually doing our best to make sure that the only people receiving our e-mails are those that actually want to receive them.

    Long story short, if you've unsubscribed via our website, and you are still receiving e-mails (promoting the latest deals), please contact postmaster@overstock.com

    As a further peace offering, to be absolutely certain you are no longer bothered by unwanted e-mails (from us), feel free to contact me directly at: jon@overstock.com. I'm offering you this address as a token of my sincerity.

    Overstock, as a company, is opposed to SPAM. I, as an engineer and administrator, detest SPAM, so please believe me that I sincerely want to make sure that you're not getting pestered by unwanted e-mails (from us).

    This offer stands for any of the rest of you loyal Slashdot readers. Overstock has some great deals to offer you, but if you don't want to hear about them, please let us know (you can unsubscribe on the website, or contact us via either e-mail addresses I've mentioned). Thanks for your patience. I look forward to hearing from you and serving you.

    - Jon Fullmer

  35. Can we have this law everywhere, please? by tiger99 · · Score: 1
    I think there needs to be world-wide agreement and coordination on issues like this, because the net is world-wide. Any sane person except certain unscrupulous marketing people, and some politicians, who can't grasp the concept, would agree that spyware should go.

    It is unfortunate that the IETF, or W3C, or some other democractic body who understands the issues can not be delegated the task of setting internet law. It should not be left to local or state level either, it is an international thing, it needs an international solution. Nevertheless, this is a good start.

    In some places this is arguably covered by existing laws, for example in the UK the Data Protection Act might have some effect, but it also might criminalise the unfortunate person whose PC got infected with spyware and so disclosed someone else's personal data. That is why a uniform approach is vital.

  36. Targeted ads can be good for consumers by EaglesNest · · Score: 1
    Personally, if I'm using Overstock, but another company can provide me the same service for a lower price, I'd like to know about it. Sure, many of the ad-ware advertisers are scum, but this law appears to cut off a valuable service that can benefit consumers.

    That said, I always use Mozilla and have Pop-up ad blocking. Still, the law should not ban ads if consumers WANT the pop-ups from competitors to services that they are visiting. Overstock risks crossing the line and acting uncompetitively in a way that harms consumers and increases prices for everyone.