Major Advertisers Caught In Spyware Net

theodp writes "BW reports on Fortune 500 companies' use of adware - Sprint for its PCS phones, major banks peddling Visa cards, Sony and retailers including Circuit City. And Mercedes-Benz before the company, fielding complaints, put on the brakes. So far, law enforcement has mostly targeted the transmitters, but NY Attorney General Eliot Spitzer is threatening to hold accountable household-name advertisers that use adware networks. No longer, says Spitzer, can companies play dumb."

Comments

excellent

[choongiri]

quite simply, the only way we will see the end of adware and spam is if they stop being profitable. this is excellent news, and i sincerely hope goes ahead with his threat.

I see a problem with this approach by the NY AG

[einhverfr]

So, if I want to harass my competitors, I can release spyware with their ads on it or pay for spyware distribution in their name? This would subject them to needless prosecution and distraction?

The transmitters can easily be traced. It is much harder to trace the source of the ads themselves. For civil suits, the "preponderance of evidence" might be a pretty weak standard because there is not much to go on to discredit the prosecution. Of course IANAL...

Re:I see a problem with this approach by the NY AG

[Thanatopsis]

Not really - the AG would simply follow the money, right back to you. Spizer is going after willful ignorance, namely when you suspect there's a problem but chose just not to investigate it too closely thus remaining willfully ignorant.

how bloody convenient...

[advocate_one]

That's making many advertisers nervous, though they insist they work with subcontractors and often don't know about any adware use until they get a complaint.

"There's plausible deniability at each tier," said Chris King, product marketing manager at anti-spyware vendor Blue Coat Systems Inc.

to put it politely... bollocks... they subcontract it, they are responsible for it... they can't fob off the responsibility to the subcontractors... they are responsible for making sure that their subcontractors do it legally and ethically...

I hope this works out...

[Kagura]

Unfortunately, unless some other big names in law jump on this, we won't see anything more of this after this article. This won't be the first time something like this happened.

"Follow the money"

[PornMaster]

The concept of "follow the money" unfortunately works way too well. Whether it's funding adware asshats or terrorist organizations, in order to cripple the bad guys, cutting off funding works wonders.

Good info from Ben Edelman

[Hulkster]

Ben Edelman has been writing about *&^%$#@! spyware for quite some time and not only provides information and actual video's of how these guys operate, but also untangles some of the financial backing of the companies and VC who are behind 'em.

The Big Green Guy ought to pay a visit to the spyware companies and do a World Wrestling Federation Hulk Drop on 'em! ;-)

This happens more than you know

[demonic-halo]

This happened to our company numrous times. We use a variety of advertising agencies like comission junction, doubleclick.com, etc... We basically don't really know what they're doing most of the time, we just give them a tracking code and a URL to lead customers and calculate how many leads per $$$ they generate.

Alot of the times, many of these sites like Comission Junction, just empowers members to post our links whereever. They just take our links, add their tracking code and URL to it, and give them to their members to include on their website. These members sometimes will result in dubious behavior to generate hits, and will often use ways to force the links on you. I'm sure you probably see those "Free" something that tell you to click on a dozen link before they send you the free iPod or something, then afterwards, find some trick to get out of sending you that iPod. Others sometimes use adware and other malicous software methods.

Sometimes we see certain agencies generate such good results, we give them even more money. We don't realize they're doing wrong until we start getting complaints. I've witness things such as our ads being included in adware (like Gator), porn sites, spam mail, chat bots, etc...

It's really hard to hard to control the means our ads get distributed using 3rd party agencies. But we're sort of forced to rely on them since we're a small company with little know how in advertising. It's much easier to pay other people do the work and focus on developing a good product.

Re:This happens more than you know

[rhizome]

>It's really hard to hard to control the means our ads get distributed using 3rd party agencies.

What you describe is willful ignorance. You know the problem exists but you just push the blame down the chain. This whole issue could be avoided if you put some care into the contracts you sign. It's probably better than getting sued by the NY Attorney General.

Re:This happens more than you know

[Todd Knarr]

And why don't you know what the subcontractors you're using are doing? I know that, in every other industry that subcontracts work, the general contractor is ultimately responsible for the work. If they don't know what the subcontractor's doing, they get dinged for that on top of the actual faults in the work. Perhaps, if you don't have the expertise to ride herd on your subcontractors yourself, you should begin doing what construction and other general contractors do and write clauses into your advertising contracts that provide for big, nasty penalties for subcontractors who use adware/spyware and make those subcontractors liable to you for any problems they cause that cause you any liability, plus requires the people you hire to include indentical clauses in their contracts with anyone they subcontract out to as well (with likewise nasty penalties for failing to do so). Then enforce those clauses strictly. If the agency balks, take your business elsewhere because that's a sure sign they are doing something underhanded and don't want to be nailed down on it.

Re:This happens more than you know

[tomhudson]

4 words: willful ignorance, due dilligence

1. Nobody is forcing you to advertise on the net (which even in 1999 was already the LEAST effective means of advertising, and has gotten worse in terms of credibility, results per dollar spent, etc)
2. Nobody is forcing you to use the agencies you mentioned. Its not hard to check out the people you're dealing with. That you don't is the hallmark of the wilfully ignorant who don't do their due diligence
3. Contrary to what you state, its very easy to control how your ads get distributed - just put in a clause that provides financial penalties if they use adware/spyware. Agencies that won't agree to that are obviously not going to make the short list. That you are so desperate that you go with someone who won't agree to such terms is a sign that your business plan is doomed.

It's much easier to pay other people do the work and focus on developing a good product.

What good is it developing a good product if, by the time you get to market, you've already pissed off every possible consumer?

How is this any different?

[artemis67]

Can't companies already commit crimes in the name of their competitors? So, what's so special about the online world that is suddenly going to embolden people to commit federal crimes?

Don't you think that if someone is misrepresenting Proctor & Gamble, the NY AG is going to go straight to P&G and get their full compliance in solving the crime?

And for the companies commiting the fraud, is it really worth putting their entire company on the line over a stupid adware stunt?

Expedia just doesn't get it!

[tomhudson]

FTFA:

Some advertisers defend the practice.

"It is just a marketing tool that we use," said Expedia spokesman David Dennis.

So, maybe we can use the same line of reasoning for a DDoS of Expedia - "Its just an anti-spyware/adware measure that we use."

I swear, do companies go out of their way to hire the lowest-IQ, most mouth-breathing knuckle-dragging, slope-foreheaded idiot they can find to be company shill^Wspokesman, or is it a side-effect of the job?

Where is that Adware being used?

[ImaLamer]

Considering the software that often uses bundled adware and spyware is questionable at best (Kazaa at one time, other - more bogus - P2P software bundles) I wonder how much these Fortune 500 companies have funded even dirtier scams.

You know someone who has clicked a "free screensaver" or "system performance" pop-up before only to get trojans and adware. Does Circuit City endorse these scams on user intelligence? [Oxymoron I know]

Let's not even mention Compaq who bundles WeatherBug on their new machines!

Is it always going to be "us" versus the corporations? And why do I feel more libertarian and less "liberal" everyday?

I guess the solution is simple - start a list of people to boycott based on their aggressive advertising.

Why expect so much from Capital One?

[AFCArchvile]

But the last straw came a year ago when the pop-ups began plugging such household names as J.C. Penney Co. and Capital One Financial Corp., companies McMann expected to know better.

So this person expects Capital One, a company known for making the corniest commercials on TV, and a participant in the national scheme pushing limitless interest rates and exorbitant fees, to not engage in adware? I'd expect Capital One to be one of the FIRST and BIGGEST users of adware, popups, and direct marketing.

They put David Spade on our television screens two years longer than necessary; that alone is evil enough!

Eliot Spitzer == Superhero?

[adam31]

I feel like he should walk around with a mask and fluorescent yellow-and-orange spandex and wear a cape with a Red E emblazoned within a square... That guy is like the last real American hero.

Although, I doubt he could actually bring successful legal action against the 'household-name advertisers'... hopefully the threat is enough to choke off the money flow. Who cares about all the spigots when you can shut down the water main?

Re:End benefactor rule

[Xwild]

I'm a resident of NY, and I'd have to say, he IS a good guy from what I've heard in the news.

When northern NY was hit by the massive ice storm in 1998, Spitzer laid down the law on price gouging really quick. And even went so far as to get peoples money refunded.http://www.oag.state.ny.us/press/2000/dec /dec11a_00.html

Check out his office's website at http://www.oag.state.ny.us/ Quite possibly the most helpful gov't webpage I've ever been on. Yeah, Spitzer is a good AG.. and I'm a Republican no less!