Slashdot Mirror
Adware Related To Web Sites Ruled Legal
Cobb writes "The 2nd U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals recently ruled that it is legal for adware programs to show you pop ups for knock-offs and rivals when you visit a companies website. 'In 1-800 Contacts's lawsuit against adware provider WhenU.com, the appeals court likened WhenU's ads to retail stores that place generic competitors next to brand-name products.'"
I just block all ads with my host file. If their domain name resolve to 0.0.0.0 then there is nothing to display or popup
& ie=UTF-8&oe=UTF-8
http://www.google.com/search?q=host+file+block+ad
Slight modification to my example. In the case of WhenU, Cosmo doesn't have a choice because the user has supposedly agreed to view the advertisements. Mr. Cosmo will just have to live with this situation or help fight the legality of adware to install itself on a user's computer (a separate issue from this ruling).
Javascript + Nintendo DSi = DSiCade
This ruling supports the principle that people can do what they want with their own desktop, even if it covers up someone's advertising.
Today it's an evil adware company. But tomorrow, it could be the AdBlock project.
Don't lose sight of the forest for the trees.
The trademark issue is significant. But my freedom to do what I want with my computer is more important.
Offshore servers are pretty useless. If you're transmitting to the US you can be held to answer in a US court. Regardless of where your server might happen to be, if you have assets in the US banking system, they can be siezed. Likewise, if you set foot in the US, you can be arrested. Courts take a very broad view of their jurisdiction.
In any event, regardless of where the servers might be, the courts interpretation of trademark law is correct. Despite some of the implications, this is still a good thing.
bance.net
The thing is, the court "views WhenU's ads as authorized" - so they're assuming that the user chose to install the program.
They are not dealing with the possibility that the adware was installed without the user's knowledge and/or consent here - that is another issue.
When you think of it that way - maybe I want to install a program that automatically gives me info on the competing products of those that I search for. Why should that be illegal? Why should a website that I'm viewing have any say on what other software I am allowed to run, or other pages I am allowed to view?
And it's not really BK ads in McD's "plastered all over" - the ads are client-side, as you say - so it's only the users who choose (so we assume) to install this software who see the ads.
Here's something that may help with accidental clicks: don't use mouse clicks to shift the focus back to your browser window, use a key combination like Alt-Tab (on windows - on Unix, consult your window manager's man page, or use a window manager that never shifts focus automatically).
:)
Outside of that, be sure to use AdBlock, disable pop-ups and all that - I can't even remember the last time I saw a pop-up on my own computer.
quidquid latine dictum sit altum videtur.
Except for the fact that this is not what was ruled on. The court did not go into how this particular piece of adware was installed, whether the user knew about it, consented to it or anything; rather, it merely said that *assuming* that the user did, the competitor did not have a case, as, basically, the user is allowed to do what they want on their computer, *including* installing a program that displays competitors' ads when you shop for something online.
Staying in the analogy, the robot plastering those ads on the inside of your car would exist, but the court merely ruled that when you go to McDonald's and willingly and knowingly have a robot in your car that then displays Burger King ads to you, that *McDonald's* does not have a case.
And that seems quite reasonable to me.
quidquid latine dictum sit altum videtur.
You know, this is an issue that comes up with some crazy webmasters and Opera - see environmentalchemistry.com with Opera to see what I mean.
For those who don't have Opera: it redirects to this page.
I can't get through to environmentalchemistry.com with Firefox, either - it says I'm blocking banner ads, but refuses to let me in even when I follow its instructions to disable Adblock temporarily.
To put it bluntly: the webmaster is harming himself by making about 90% of tech-savvy users hate him. I can't even find out what his site is about without jumping through hoops? Fuck that.