Slashdot Mirror

← Back to Stories (view on slashdot.org)

House To Enact Anti-Spyware Law

Posted by Zonk on from the but-bonzer-buddy-wants-to-be-your-friend! dept.

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.

22 of 252 comments (clear)

  1. hmmmm by commo1 · · Score: 5, Insightful

    What about all those who signed the Gator/Gain network EULA which prohibits the removal of said spyware/adware from PCs?

    1. Re:hmmmm by cplusplus · · Score: 5, Informative

      Law takes precedent over a EULA.

      --
      "False hope is why we'll never run out of natural resources!" - Lewis Black
    2. Re:hmmmm by hey! · · Score: 5, Insightful

      That's an interesting question.

      Technically (and I stress "technically"), what they are doing here amoutns to taking a right away from the consumer: the right to enter into a contract with a vendor to receive software in return for providing information about their browser habits. The problem is that the vendors are dishonest, and take advantage of the fact that most people can't make it through the legalese in their licenses or don't really understand the implications of what they are doing.

      In any case, IANAL, but isn't this the sort of thing that usually ends up in the UCC for constitutional reasons?

      --
      Post may contain irony: discontinue use if experiencing mood swings, nausea or elevated blood pressure.
    3. Re:hmmmm by Spy+der+Mann · · Score: 4, Interesting

      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.

    4. Re:hmmmm by Anonymous+Custard · · Score: 4, Insightful

      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?

      Prostitution is a strange legal area to me (IANAL).

      There are all sorts of things that are illegal to do without consent, but are perfectly legal to do with consent.

      Fighting (Martial Arts vs. Assault), sex (consentual vs. rape), taking things (Free Halloween Candy vs. Burglary) - all these things are drastically different when you add the consent of both parties.

      Prostitution is consentual sex + money. In theory it isn't any more dangerous than consentual sex without money. And when properly regulated, then even in practice it's still not any more dangerous.

      Many women legally have sex for money reasons, even if it's not a direct obvious exchange as with prostitution.

      So why is it illegal?

      --
      $8.95/mo web hosting
  2. As if It's Going to Do A Thing... by iammrjvo · · Score: 4, Insightful


    Sure, some of the "legitimate" US companies pushing this stuff will obey the new law, but it's not going to do a thing to stop people in other jurisdictions or criminals who just don't care what the law says.

    Kind of like "Gun Control" I might add.

    --
    Ha, ha! Nobody ever says Italy.
    1. Re:As if It's Going to Do A Thing... by geoffrobinson · · Score: 4, Insightful

      Accurate analogy people on slashdot won't like and may mod you down for aside, you are correct. Human nature and history being what it is, you are probably correct. The people who would obey this law, probably aren't the people performing this activity to begin with.

      --
      Except for ending slavery, the Nazis, communism, & securing American independence, war has never solved anything.
  3. Who named this? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 5, Funny

    Securely Protect Yourself Against Cyber Trespass Act (SPY ACT)

    So wouldn't this be the SPY ACT Act?

    Are these the same people who scream about having their PIN Numbers stolen at the ATM Machines?

    1. Re:Who named this? by EkkiEkkiShiwaddle · · Score: 4, Funny
      No, no, you don't understand - it has nothing to do with SPY ACT.

      Securely Protect Yourself Against Cyber Trespass Act refers to the Klingon "Spyac T'A!", which means "save yourself from cyber trespassers".

      So you see, the name is indeed a very good one.

      Yeah, that must be it.

    2. Re:Who named this? by Doesn't_Comment_Code · · Score: 4, Insightful

      So wouldn't this be the SPY ACT Act?

      Yes, it should. But it took a pool of congressional interns 1000 man-hours to come up with that name. If you want better names, income taxes will have to be raised by 0.1% to account for more time.

      Likewise, if we didn't come up with a cutesy acronym or nickname for every bill through congress, taxes might be lowered by the same amount.

      --

      Slashdot Syndrome: the sudden, extreme urge to correct someone in order to validate one's self.
  4. And, thanks to this... by Zangief · · Score: 5, Interesting

    Spyware will be "legal", just like the CAN-SPAM act...

    Thank you for your stupid technology laws, American Congress!

  5. Cut It Out by Doesn't_Comment_Code · · Score: 5, Funny

    I would like to see a bill that prohibits congress from awkwardly wording bill names to create acronyms.

    --

    Slashdot Syndrome: the sudden, extreme urge to correct someone in order to validate one's self.
    1. Re:Cut It Out by OECD · · Score: 5, Funny

      I would like to see a bill that prohibits congress from awkwardly wording bill names to create acronyms.

      I agree. We can call it the No Acronyms May Exist act.

      Wait...

      --
      One man's -1 Flamebait is another man's +5 Funny.
  6. Law may have positive effect by CA_Jim · · Score: 5, Insightful

    Two positive thoughs on this.

    One - if written and applied correctly in the US, at least it is a legal tool against some of the spyware, making it more costly for them.

    Two - if it's somewhat successful, it may make Congress look back at CAN-SPAM and fix it.

    Okay I'm optimistic here.

  7. B..b..but by GillBates0 · · Score: 4, Funny
    Won't somebody think of the Bonzie Buddy?

    Bonzie Buddy loves children!

    "SPYACT kills cute furry pets" campaign.

    --
    An Indian-American Hindu committed to non-violent thought/speech/action alarmed by the global explosion of radical Islam
  8. Not a legal problem. by chill · · Score: 5, Insightful

    Spyware is a technical problem. Congress and the public should have learned from the CAN SPAM act, more accurately called "You Can Spam" Act. Spam is at an all-time high.

    People don't read click-thru licenses now, what makes anyone think they're going to read them in the future?

    The antivirus companies, who already have the technology and infrastructure, need to extend their scanning of executables to include ANY software that collects data and phones home. Make a big list and update it with the AV updates. When anything is installed that hit the list, pop up a big "POTENTIAL SPYWARE - ARE YOU SURE?" box.

    Yet another "vote for me, I feel your pain" law isn't going to do anyone any good.

    -Charles

    --
    Learning HOW to think is more important than learning WHAT to think.
    1. Re:Not a legal problem. by Rasta+Prefect · · Score: 4, Insightful

      The antivirus companies, who already have the technology and infrastructure, need to extend their scanning of executables to include ANY software that collects data and phones home. Make a big list and update it with the AV updates. When anything is installed that hit the list, pop up a big "POTENTIAL SPYWARE - ARE YOU SURE?" box.

      What this will do is provide the AV companies with a legal defense when purveyors of bundled spyware which the user authorized in paragraph 27 subparagraph z3 come knocking and complaining about interfering with contracts and restraint of trade.

      --
      Why?
  9. From Strength to Strength by Doc+Ruby · · Score: 4, Insightful

    I can't wait for the Congress to protect us from spyware as effectively as they've protected us from spam.

    --

    --
    make install -not war

  10. Securely Protect Yourself by CastrTroy · · Score: 4, Interesting

    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.
  11. Story is slightly over-rated. by essreenim · · Score: 4, Insightful
    Right som MS are allowed to inspect my machine to see if I'm authorised to run their software.

    Actually, there is no problem with this, and it is not genuine spyware tactics. Sorry if I start a flamewar here, but if you insist on using Windows, then you should be paying for it and they have every right to inspect your machine to see if you are. This is the aggreement you sign up to.

    Also, I don't see how this affects programs loke Gator as g. parent suggests. They are playing by the same rules. If their software doesn't comply, they should be able to make changes without significantly altering it.

    Anyway, it's not my problem I don'r use Windows. Good luck!!.

    Anyway, spyware will probably find a way to evolve with this..

  12. Meaningless by Kozar_The_Malignant · · Score: 4, Insightful

    This, like Can Spam and others, will have no effect until it starts putting people in prison for some Mitnick-style hard time. It will be especially effective if it puts people who wear suits to work into prison. Until that happens, it is to laugh.

    --
    Some mornings it's hardly worth chewing through the restraints to get out of bed.
  13. Hmm... by deemaunik · · Score: 4, Interesting

    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.