Slashdot Mirror
iDownload Tries to Silence Spyware Critics
Doug Muth writes "According to this article over on DSL Reports, yet another spyware author, iDownload, has been sending out cease and desist letters to sites that classify their iSearch toolbar as Spyware. Some research reveals that yes, iSearch really does take over users' computers. A search on Spyware Guide also turns up a writeup on iSearch."
Contradicting the article's claim that the industry isn't standing up to these guys, it's nice to see that CastleCops have themselves retained council, and their rebuttal http://castlecops.com/article-5765-nested-0-0.html doesn't pull any punches.
if it walks like a duck and quacks like a duck....
The write-up says they say they have the right to install 3rd party software anytime after you agreed without further input from you. They may even disable others adware, thus breaking programs that came with those.
Its a duck
Now how do you make em stop quacking?
its considered defacement. Lavasoft got into it with Gator over this.
"No one is more miserable than the person who wills everything and can do nothing." -Emperor Claudius 10 BC - AD 54
The EULA states:
...
...
The software may conveniently without your input or interaction install Third Party Software on your computer
There is really only one way to look at that
http://toolbar.isearch.com/terms.html
Just in case you want to let his lawyer know that his client is in the wrong and that the first amendment is something we hold dear. Here y'all go:
mark@ssjmlaw.com
Mark D. Hopkins
Telephone: (512) 347-1604
Fax: (512) 347-1676
The Overlook at Gaines Ranch
4330 S. Mopac, Ste. 150
Austin, Texas, 78735
iSearch claims it "displays links to and advertisements of related websites based on the information you view and the websites you visit; store non-personally identifiable statistics of the websites you have visited;"
If that isn't spyware, I don't what is. In fact, isn't that the definition of "spyware"?
They also claim to "conveniently without your input or interaction; install software from iSearch affiliates; and install Third Party Software".
That's scary stuff!
They also clam that their antivirus software (part of their suite) is ICSA certified. Funny, I don't see their product on ICSA's certification list
Crooked, deceptive or not... Would you want your software uninstalled by other software that claimed yours was "Bad"?
I write software for a living, and sell it for a living, and support it, etc.
I am not the least bit worried about other people's software uninstalling mine.
Why?
Because, it's ultimately the end-users decision. The owner or owners of a PC get to decide what to do with it. Would I be pissed if a competitor was targetting my stuff and auto-breaking/disabling it? Yes. Are there legal remedies available to me? You bet.
I am I pissed if an end-user decides to install some software that decides my software is bad? NO, not at all. Why is it bad? For disk space reasons, performance, or some bogus false-flag? What can I do to make my software better, that's what I am interested in.
Citizens have final total dominion over their private property, and that's how it should be. If someone wants to install something that breaks one of "my" products, well then, too bad for me.
This is the link that isearch.com provides through thier FAQ about removing the spyware...it offers an executable that claims to be an uninstaller...haven't tried it as not only do i lack the spyware but I'm also on a public comp with no way to see what it does...
My expierence with spyware companies leads me to belive that this is even worse than the original spyware, but if anyone with a computer they're willing to sacrifice or a honeypot for spyware wants to try it, they've at least provided something that they claim will remove their spyware...
That depends. Are you talking about the spyware laws or the article the rest of us are talking about? It's all depends on who is the defendant and if it's a civil or criminal case.
Searching google lead me to the license http://toolbar.isearch.com/terms.html which has a real address in nevada. It seems like it is some type of holding company http://www.nvcorpserv.com/ because there are other legit looking business with different owners. Some are overseas owners ex. http://www.xericdesign.com/cv.php probably incorporating in Nevada for tax purposes.
I'm sure with more work we can find the information necessary to expose these people on public forums, more than just exposing the company. We should have names to point fingers at otherwise these people will disappear to reappear under another name. If these people have to face having their actions made public perhaps the second batch will think twice before acting negligent.
eWeek.com is reporting that "Dozens of blogs hosted by Google Inc.'s Blogger service can install programs that are widely considered to be spyware and adware onto visitors' computers...In many cases, users are discovering the offending sites as they browse among blogs through Blogger's navigation bar. The offending blogs typically prompt visitors to accept downloads through misleading pop-up windows." Here is the link to the article: http://www.eweek.com/article2/0,1759,1768836,00.as p
Sun and Fun
No. There's no copyright issue whatsoever.
They might be able to argue that the spyware removal software is interfering with contracts between them and their users (as I believe some actually have tried to argue), but good luck convincing a court. At best, they could try to sue the people who installed their spyware, agreed to their ridiculous EULA, and then broke the EULA by removing it. I imagine the first person sued under those pretenses would just need to get a single Windows users on the jury, countersue for 1 billion dollars, and seize all of the spyware company's assets.
Don't blame me; I'm never given mod points.
EULA.
:-))
Only removal by going to address http://toolbar.isearch.com/uninstall. (I think I'm going to make that my homepage now.
Can't dispute anything - have to go through arbitration.
Oh, and can't use any 3rd party tool to remove the software. nice.
That depends on what you define as "problem."
If you define "problem" to mean that you can loose in court, then I suspect that you would be OK.
If you define "problem" to mean that you wind up in court in the first place and have to blow your life savings and any equity in your house on lawyer fees, then I could see that there might be a problem.
Remember, the court appoints you an attorney for free ONLY in criminal matters. In civil court, you are on your own.
"-1 Troll" is the apparently the same as "-1 I disagree with you."
If this outrages you, well, it should. Best way to express this is by contributing to any anti-spyware defenese funds that get organized.
That's one way. Another is to rediscover our right of Jury Nullification.
People will quit filing bullshit lawsuits when juries stop handing them victories.
LK
"Hi. This is my friend, Jack Shit, and you don't know him." - Lord Kano
- Company X does something bad
- Citizen Group Y complains about it (in a newsletter, road sign, whatever)
- Knowing that Citizen Group Y has limited funds and cannot afford a long, protracted legal battle, Company X files a lawsuit against Citizen Group Y, claiming they're disparaging their product or otherwise defaming their business (can you believe there's actual laws that serve as a basis for this crap? I mean, what the hell is "food disparagement" anyway?)
- Citizen Group Y caves in, Company X resumes doing evil without tarnishing its good name
Fortunately, more and more states are getting wise and passing Anti-SLAPP laws, which gives legal grounds for requesting early dismissal of a SLAPP suit. Even though this might not keep you out of court, early dismissal can prevent protracted, expensive legal battles.