Slashdot Mirror
Washington State Outlaws Spyware
An anonymous reader submits "Today, the Governor of Washington signs a a bill outlawing spyware (bill history) which imposes penalties of $100,000 per violation. Spyware is broadly defined. It includes everything from changing a browser's bookmarks or homepage settings, "Opening multiple, sequential, stand-alone advertisements in the owner or operator's internet browser", keystroke-logging, taking over control of the computer, modify its security settings, and even "Falsely representing that computer software has been disabled." But here is my favorite: "Prevent, through intentionally deceptive means, an owner or operator's reasonable efforts to block the installation or execution of, or to disable, computer software by causing the software that the owner or operator has properly removed or disabled automatically to reinstall or reactivate on the computer." Microsoft and Ebay both testified in support of the bill. On May 10th, a similar law banning Internet and email phishing was also passed."
Washington state also outlawed killing sasquatch.
I love the idea that we are making something so irritating illegal in the strick legal sense of the word. Make no mistake, I hate Spyware.
At least I think I hate Spyware. I am not really sure, given the broad definition. Some Spyware is good, based solely on MY definition of 'good' and the mood I am in. So what if I have to give up something 'good' because the purveyors of that 'good' thing felt it might fit into the broad definition of Spyware and thusly discontinued it. I lose.
On the other hand, the creepy porn junk and the crud that wants my bank account so they can sell me into slavery in Korea definitely (again, in MY definition of...) fit the model of BAD Spyware and need to have its purveyors captured, subjected to Janet Jackson Videos and sent to prison for a long time. And thus begs the question:
How does this law get that done? Certainly these guys aren't going to stop their nonsense, they are making money doing it, so we will HAVE to enforce this law to get them to stop, and if they don't stop because there is no good way to enforce this law, then the BAD stuff continues and the GOOD stuff is thwarted.
I am just not sure about this one.
I suppose it gives teeth to companies like Microsoft and EBay to go after these guys and have them bundled away. That is good. But Who decides which ones Microsoft and EBay go after? And do I really want to create a system whereby Microsoft and EBay are the US Marshals and are enforcing laws the way they see fit, and going after those criminals that they decide to go after?
I'm just not sure about this one.
A most overlooked advantage to owning a computer is if they foul up there's no law against wacking them around a bit.
"Sea," cried Canute, "I command you to come no further! Do not dare touch my feet!"
The world's burning. Moped Jesus spotted on I50. Details at 11.
We were also one of the first to make spam illegal. I don't really think it has helped all that much...
RP is a complete pig to remove.
Wonder if it's now illegal?
In fact, I'd like all third-party hidden-startup applications, which generally are unwanted and adopt this method since they know they'd be removed, to be illegal. I get VERY annoyed when other people feel fit to try to force their software into *MY* computer. How would they feel if I came into their front room and took over the remote control?
--
Toby
That is not a bad point, in general - if I write a program with a security vulnerability, and people use this vulnerability to install spyware on people's computers, do I share the blame with the spyware writers?
Guy asked me for a quarter for a cup of coffee. So I bit him.
.. is to make companies accountable for the actions of their 'affiliates'. Many a spyware company uses this defence, and end up gaining customers from dodgy affiliates who they don't need to pay as the affiliate has broken the terms and conditions. Genius. Their business model is just like bill posting on roads and streets.
Okay, it might just be me, and I might just be an idiot here, but isn't spyware illegal already, since it's modifying the contents of my computer without my knowledge or authorization? To me, it seems that spyware makers should be prosecuted just like anyone else who writes malicious code (viruses, trojans, worms, and so on).
Any technically-literate lawyers have a comment on this?
Some of the better places to go to get spyware are places in russia or developing countries, etc.
The advantage and disadvantage of the internet is that you can go access web sites from anywhere.
By making it tough for any group/organization to spread their malware from washington state, means they'll go elsewhere to host their stuff.
Suppose all the spyware people jump ship and go elsewhere, somebody WILL find a site that has it and will get the spyware.
It's like passing a law that makes it illegal to skid out of control and hitting a particular tree in the hopes of eliminating accidents.
Have you ever tried installing AIM from AOL? It install links everywhere regardless of if you tell it 'no' in the setup process. Maybe they'll finally change this.
How would they feel if I came into their front room and took over the remote control?
The same way a Mafia racketeer would feel if you threatened to burn their house down if they didn't pay for your "fire insurance".
They aren't children; they know people hate what they do. As long as the annoying thing is happening to you for the profit of them, then they don't care, whether "they" are the Mafia or Gator or whoever.
The enemies of Democracy are
So, will MS finally stop shipping Alexa with IE?
Oh well, what the hell...
As far as I'm concerned, start arresting them all. I don't want their sh!tware on my box. I want their stuff to sit there nice and quiet up until the moment I want it to do something, and then I want it to do nothing extra. I don't want a pop-up "toolbox" to fix my printer; I don't want a noisy "Lookie what I printed for you, John, aren't you proud of my wonderous inkjets?!" dialog box. And when it's done I want it to get the hell out of my way. Completely. Don't ask me to update, don't leave a tool tray icon behind, don't leave a task running in task manager.
If all this requires sending a few developers to Federal Pound Me In The Ass Prison, all I can say is "don't drop the soap, guys."
John
But... MS is one of the largest employers in the state. Their employees are highly paid. Those employees spend money, buy expensive houses, etc. Microsoft builds buildings, buys land, and supports the arts and such. And lets not forget all the computers and software that they donate/discout for the state and it's schools.
Washington state will not piss off Microsoft. It is a fact. When those state AGs sued because they didn't like the settlement the DOJ did with Microsoft, was the Washington State AG among them? Why do you think that was?
MS is behind this law because if it works, it removes some (much?) of their responsibility (and also codifies in law that spyware is the programmer's fault, and doesn't specify it to be MS's fault). If the law said that, do you think it would have gotten a vote, let alone pass?
Things like this happen. At least it is a win for the consumer if it works, even if MS still isn't held accountable. All us geeks can do is answer questions from friends truthfully. "What's with/causes/why is there so much spyware?"... "Microsoft." Grass roots will work, we just need it to be organized. But then again we need to do that with lots of things (accepting buggy software, the release-then-patch mantra, overpriced software, etc.)
Comment forecast: Bits of genius surrounded by a sea of mediocrity.
Like many others, I consider Real Player to essentially be spyware.
I think (correct me if I'm wrong) that Real are based in Washington State. So what's the impact here, for both current and future versions of Real Player? Would make an interesting test case.
Read reviews of shopping cart software
This is exactly why I don't let my PC watch TV.
And the driver that copy protected CD's install without your permission to prevent the tracks from being ripped? I had to clean up one of these last week while I was ripping music for my father in law's new iPOD....
09F91102 no, 455FE104 nope, F190A1E8 uh-uh, 7A5F8A09 that's not it, C87294CE no. Ah! 452F6E403CDF10714E41DFAA257D313F.
Won't this ban some of those 'copy-protected' CDs that automaticaly install some kind of driver through auto-run?
If Alice was an interior decorator who, on gaining access to a client's home, did stuff like:
- Changed all the speed-dial numbers on the telephone
- Installed listening/recording devices in all the rooms
- Modified the TV/video so it overlays ads of her choice over the top of programs (in addition to the regular ads screened by the station)
- Duplicated door keys and alarm codes and sold these to others
- etc
then Alice would be doing hard time at Club Fed or Her Majesty's.So why should it be any different with software?
When someone runs your software on their computer, they have admitted you into their sovereign private space, and you have a responsibility to behave in a manner respecting this. Well done, Washington. I note also that the Australian Democrats party has introduced similar legislation, which God-willing will also pass.
-- In the beginning was the WORD, and the WORD was UNSIGNED, and the main(){} was without form and void...