Slashdot Mirror
Spyware Fines OKed By House
glimmy writes "The US House of Represenatives passed a bill that imposes fines on the use of Spyware by a majority of 399-1. This bill excludes programs used by the FBI or spy agencies, though."
← Back to Stories (view on slashdot.org)
They reason why Rep. Ron Paul voted against it is that he really sticks to what he believes, and one of the things he believes is that the goverment should stay out of transactions between private citizens.
I am not one way or another if I think he voted correctly on this or any issue in the past, but you have to admire one of the few people in DC that doesn't sell out what they believe.
"If we let things terrify us, life will not be worth living."
- Seneca
Lifted out the definitions within the bill for those questioning. For the full bill follow this link. http://thomas.loc.gov/cgi-bin/query/D?c108:1:./tem p/~c108Rz52yN::
(3) SPYWARE PROGRAM- The term `spyware program' means any computer program or software that can be used to transmit from a computer, or that has the capability of so transmitting, by means of the Internet and without any action on the part of the user of the computer to initiate such transmission, information regarding the user of the computer, regarding the use of the computer, or that is stored on the computer. In issuing regulations to carry out this paragraph, the Commission shall distinguish spyware programs from other commonly used computer programs used to share information among computers in an organized network of computers.
(4) PAGE- The term `page' means, with respect to the World Wide Web, a location that has a single Uniform Resource Locator or other single location with respect to the Internet, as the Commission may prescribe.
(5) PERSONALLY IDENTIFIABLE INFORMATION- The term `personally identifiable information' does not include any record of aggregate data that does not identify particular persons, particular computers, particular users of computers, or particular email addresses or other locations of computers with respect to the Internet.
I stole this
According to this article at News.com, it was "Rep. Ron Paul, R-Texas, a vocal libertarian who frequently says the federal government should not be policing the Internet, was the lone dissenter."
But why is the rum gone?
Please define "spyware"
Here are the criteria specified in the bill
http://thomas.loc.gov
H.R. 2929
(1) Taking control of the computer by--
(A) utilizing such computer to send unsolicited information or material from the protected computer to others;
(B) diverting the Internet browser of the computer, or similar program of the computer used to access and navigate the Internet, away from the site the user intended to view, to one or more other Web pages, such that the user is prevented from viewing the content at the intended Web page;
(C) accessing or using the modem, or Internet connection or service, for the computer and thereby causing damage to the computer or causing the owner or authorized user to incur unauthorized financial charges;
(D) using the computer as part of an activity performed by a group of computers that causes damage to another computer; or
(E) delivering advertisements that a user of the computer cannot close without turning off the computer or closing all sessions of the Internet browser for the computer.
(2) Modifying settings related to use of the computer or to the computer's access to or use of the Internet by altering--
(A) the Web page that appears when the owner or authorized user launches an Internet browser or similar program used to access and navigate the Internet;
(B) the default provider used to access or search the Internet, or other existing Internet connections settings;
(C) a list of bookmarks used by the computer to access Web pages; or
(D) security or other settings of the computer that protect information about the owner or authorized user.
(3) Collecting personally identifiable information through the use of a keystroke logging function or similar function.
(4) Inducing the owner or authorized user to install a computer software component onto the computer, or preventing reasonable efforts to block the installation or execution of, or to disable, a computer software component by--
(A) presenting the owner or authorized user with an option to decline installation of a software component such that, when the option is selected by the owner or authorized user, the installation nevertheless proceeds; or
(B) causing a computer software component that the owner or authorized user has properly removed or disabled to automatically reinstall or reactivate on the computer.
(5) Misrepresenting that installing a separate software component or providing log-in and password information is necessary for security or privacy reasons, or that installing a separate software component is necessary to open, view, or play a particular type of content.
(6) Inducing the owner or authorized user to install or execute computer software by misrepresenting the identity or authority of the person or entity providing the computer software to the owner or user.
(7) Inducing the owner or authorized user to provide personally identifiable information to another person by misrepresenting the identity or authority of the person seeking the information.
(8) Removing, disabling, or rendering inoperative a security, anti-spyware, or anti-virus technology installed on the computer.
(9) Installing or executing on the computer one or more additional computer software components with the intent of causing a person to use such components in a way that violates any other provision of this section.
Whenever the offence inspires less horror than the punishment, the rigour of penal law is obliged to give way...
The poster takes a lot of liberties with the defintion of "spy agencies". Here's the limitations, according to the current version of the Bill:
SEC. 5. LIMITATIONS.
(a) Law Enforcement Authority- Sections 2 and 3 of this Act shall not apply to--
(1) any act taken by a law enforcement agent in the performance of official duties; or
(2) the transmission or execution of an information collection program in compliance with a law enforcement, investigatory, national security, or regulatory agency or department of the United States in response to a request or demand made under authority granted to that agency or department, including a warrant issued under the Federal Rules of Criminal Procedure, an equivalent State warrant, a court order, or other lawful process.
(b) Exception Relating to Network Security- Nothing in this Act shall apply to any monitoring of, or interaction with, a subscriber's Internet or other network connection or service by a telecommunications carrier, cable operator, or provider of information service or interactive computer service for network security purposes, diagnostics or repair in connection with a network or service, or detection or prevention of fraudulent activities in connection with a service or user agreement.
(c) Good Samaritan Protection- No provider of computer software or of interactive computer service may be held liable under this Act on account of any action voluntarily taken, or service provided, in good faith to remove or disable a program used to violate section 2 or 3 that is installed on a computer of a customer of such provider, if such provider notifies the customer and obtains the consent of the customer before undertaking such action or providing such service.
Indeed! How does "R-Texas ... a libertarian" work? Should that nor be "L-Texas", or does the index of senators only support 2 parties?
Clearly you know nothing about Republican internal politics. Many Republicans have a strong libertarian leaning. Evidence here.
"Alcohol, Tobacco, Firearms, and Explosives" should be a convenience store, not a government agency.
This is an American law affecting American companies, american citizens, and american institutions. Set up shop outside the border and you're immune, sadly.
'Fraid not.
Installing spyware on a computer in the US (even if you do it from outside the US) is an act that has a nexus in the US (the instalation of the spyware). It's the same case as a civillian in Mexico or Canada firing across the border and killing someone in the US. So the US has NO problem in declaring that a crime has been committed in the US and going after someone outside.
If the jurisdiction the bad guy is in also has such a law and an extradition treaty with the US he may just be shipped over here.
Alternatively, he can be captured and brought back extrajudicially (i.e. by a bounty hunter) or grabbed while in US territorial waters, international waters, on a US-flagged ship, on a plane that touches down in a US airport, or a number of other ways. While the snatch might not be legal where he was, that will cut no ice with the courts once he's here.
Or he can be tried in absentia and any assets the US can reached siezed.
Bantam Dominique roosters crow a four-note song. Once you've heard it as "Happy BIRTHday" you can't NOT hear it that way
Dude, it was a cookie. I've gotten plenty of Spybot warnings about Avenue A as well and every last one of them have been about cookies. What you're seeing is a third party advertiser attempt to set a cookie from their ad in order to track you. I think I'm not alone in saying that I'd prefer not to be tracked, but wouldn't call it Spyware and wouldn't blame Microsoft one bit for allowing a cookie to be set.