Security

Ask something
Discussion Locked

Outlaw Spyware Practices

0 helpful
2 replies

by bjc_199

Closed to new repliesThis discussion is closed. It stays readable, but it takes no new replies.

Yes, I think that the FTC should study the use of spyware and I think that there should be a mandatory click through license agreement that still allows one to install the software but yet lets the consumer say no to spyware.

Furthermore, I think that if a company, like for example, Iwon keeps installing spyware or adware on one's computers a consumer should have the right to get some sort of injunction blocking these companies from doing so. Furthermore, yes, you say go to windows updates and install security patches, but, yet, doing so, corrupts other files on your computer. So, yes, the FTC should ennact legislation that would require a click through license agreement meaning that a consumer only has to aggree to not violating copyright laws or the terms associated with illegal copyright practices, however, these companies must also in their license agreements must put a clause and a radio button marked yes/no to the question of whether the consumer wants to install other bundled software and they also must detail what that other software is.

I think that they do need to move on it quickly because some of the spyware and even trying to remnove it is damaging people's computers thus mnakinbg other programs not work well.

I think that the consumers should stand up to the FTC and say that we want something done about the spyware problem and maybe, to get a move on on the issue, let them know that they will be held responsible for any damages caused by private company's spyware to the personal or company computer. And yes, if these companies have hackers hacking into people's computers, these companies must also be required to turn them over to law enforcement officials.

Yes, companies should be allowed to advertise their products, but consumers should also be allowed the option of opting out. Spyware can lead to technovandalism. Companies who engage in these practices who cause damage to someone's computers should be held liable for damage caused under the neglegience theory of law.

2 replies

by thechas

Did you mean to post this in the FTC spy-ware discussion thread?

There are 2 problems with your logic here.

First, US law cannot be applied across the internet or across borders.

Second, most spy-ware is opt-in now.
If you read the End User License Agreement for many free-ware programs, part of accepting the agreement and installing the software is your approval to install the spy-ware.

The next class of spy-ware is cookies. Again, when you browse to a web-site that requires cookies, you have the option to disable cookies in your browser privacy settings.
If you don't disable cookies, or choose to accept cookies, you have given tacit approval for placing cookies on your PC.

The same arguments apply to spam.
over 90% of the spam that people get come from web-sites that they gave their e-mail address to in order to get something for free.

If people fail to read the policies and EULA's for web-sites and software, they have no one but themselves to blame for the spy-ware and spam they receive.

Chas

by oz_media

I have found several people, not the original poster here, will add a comment in a thread, if it goes unnoticed they will start a new thread with thier comment.

Personally, I think it's lame, in this case I think it was just either a mispost to the other discussion or someone stumbled on a similar idea at the same time.

This discussion is closed to new replies.