Slashdot Mirror
House To Enact Anti-Spyware Law
Stephen Samuel wrote to mention that the U.S. House of Representatives has readied the aptly acronymed Securely Protect Yourself Against Cyber Trespass Act (SPY ACT) for law. MS-BS has an article claiming that the bill allows a loophole for the makers of proprietary software. The issue at hand concerns Section 5, paragraph b, subsection 2, under the heading of limitations. The law does not apply to: "(2) a discrete interaction with a protected computer by a provider of computer software solely to determine whether the user of the computer is authorized to use such software, that occurs upon (A) initialization of the software; or (B) an affirmative request by the owner or authorized user for an update of, addition to, or technical service for, the software." The law, then, would disallow Gator and their ilk but would not hamper Microsoft's Genuine Advantage Program. More complete commentary is available at TechReview and About.com.
Spyware will be "legal", just like the CAN-SPAM act...
Thank you for your stupid technology laws, American Congress!
Securely Protect Yourself is the name of the game here. This law won't do anything to actually stop spyware, as it will probably only affect companies run out of the US. In case they haven't figured it out yet, the Internet is global. The best solution is to just protect yourself by learning basic computer skills such as don't install everything you see and use browsers that don't allow arbitrary code with full system access to be run on your computer.
Anthropic principle: We see the universe the way it is because if it were different we would not be here to see it.
Not sure, but in previous bills that were being introduced, the term "Protected Computer" meant any system under the control of a financial institution. It had nothing to do with the general users of the public.
Reminds me of a scifi book I read a while back. One of the side atmosphere bits was that each sentient species (I think there were 5) had one thing they did that really bothered the other races.
One race, for example, lived about ten times as long as anyone else.
One of them never took anything seriously.
The human race? We made clever acronyms. For everything.
Drove the other races completely mad. "It doesn't NEED an acronym! We can just give it a name! Oh my god, is that a RECURSIVE ACRONYM? I can't work under these conditions."
Breaking Into the Industry - A development log about starting a game studio.
I propose we have congress pass a law making it illegal to pass off spyware without having a confirmation "Do you accept to install this activity monitoring software?". Granted this won't help with idiots who blindly click through everything during install, this would greatly make hidden spyware less hidden.
Hiding spyware in EULAs is distasteful and dishonest at best. This damned act still lets that pass.
[!] No, I can't see my comments. They are not worthy of +3 moderation.
So if a girl signs a contract that says she has to be somebody's slave or engage in prostitution, is that contract legally valid?
No, if a law makes something illegal, any contract endorsing such unlawful behavior, becomes automatically void.
I've started a cash-only side business cleaning up spyware/viruses/crapware from frends and family members PCs. Despite my repeated suggestions to stop using Kazaa and IE, and to switch to a Mac, they insist on keeping their Windows.
Fine with me. It means an extra $200 - $300 CASH every month for me.
I love spyware.
Section 2(a)(5) says:
(It is unlawful for any person, who is not the owner or authorized user of a protected computer, to engage in deceptive acts or practices that involve(s))...
So... since MS claims that it's necessary to run Windows in order to run Office components, and since WINE amply demonstrates that it's not...
then any MS claim that Windows is necessary in order to run Office (or to access documents created in Office components) violates this bill...!?!?!
mmm... yeah... You see, we're putting the cover sheets on all TPS reports now before they go out...
If that's the case, then what happens to things like Amazon's Alexa? They put out a toolbar specifically TO track where you go (and they don't try to hide it in the least), for the purpose of tracking website popularity.
In contract law it is valid. In practice it is unenforceable on public policy grounds.
This thing is going to have so many loopholes in it, it will look like swiss cheese. Undoubtly, it will also remove various protections and other such things that are currently in place that do provide some relief from the onslaught. And in the end, you will almost certainly end up with even more of whatever it is that is being addressed with the bill.
Which confuses me, given your conclusion that this only protects financial institutions and the government.
When I log into Amazon.com's server--wherever it is (I guarantee you it's not in the state I live in, because I don't pay sales tax on the purchase), that isn't "interstate commerce"? So isn't my computer a "protected computer" (due to the use of "OR" at the end of 18 USC 1030(e)(2)(A)?) Or am I missing something?
I was under the impression (B) was present only to protect the law from violating Article 1, Section 8 "...To regulate commerce with foreign nations, and among the several states..." and Amendment 10 of the Constitution: "The powers not delegated to the United States by the Constitution, nor prohibited by it to the states, are reserved to the states respectively, or to the people."
Many laws and actions performed by the federal government (including many fair labor laws - see the definition of commerce in 17 USC 203(b)) are written in such a way to impact only those companies which have government contracts or do business in multiple states or across state lines. It's up to the states to regulate the small businesses that do not operate across state lines.