Will the FTC's spyware study create new problems?

With 50,000 servers destroyed on Saturday and millions of PCs infected by Phatbot, it's time for action. Spammers, virus writers and spyware authors are terrorists and should be treated as such by law enforcement.

Yes, Spyware is a very major concern. Should governemtn regulate the internet?, no. What best is for the commerence? Not the FTC, but pressure from the industry to prohibit spyware before the government is forced to take action. Maybe the Antivirus developers and scan for spyware as a part of an install? Lots of possibilities, let's explore as many feasable solutions before we make a quick knee-jerk reaction.

Before the FTC passes further regulation, they should look at enforcing consumer laws already in place. Off-the-shelf or on-line purchased software should clearly list "all ingredients" on the package. The consumer is able to make an informed decision long before being confronted with the license agreement for "opened" software they can not return. If other products were sold like software seems to get away with, our courts would be up to our arses in fraud and misinformation suits. I can't imagine if my child's cereal didn't include the simple "may contain nuts" statement. Oh, by the way, if you want to force more simplified EULA's, force these companies to print the EULA on the side of the package and/or on the on-line sales page in a font size equal to the sales description for the product. At least it would be a start.

Spyware is a problem, no doubt. Government interventions should be feared. One cannot expect my mom to purchase a new computer and instantly know how to install virus software, firewalls, run spyware scans, and know they will have to constantly deal with updates. How about offering a discount to buyers that take a course on PC safety and maintenance?

I think that spyware should not be tolerated. Not without my consent (ie. "Do you want to register?" and automatically opting Yes after a period of no user response).....and certainly NOT without my knowledge!!!! Thank goodness for products like ZoneLabs' Zone Alarm that alerts admins when a program tries to connect to the internet....Bravo ZoneLabs. The license agreements shouldn't be protecting the companies butt by telling a person that if you want to use our software, you must agree to this SPYWARE...and there is no other option (ie. to agree not to share the software) and still install/use it, you either agree to it or you can't install it..... NOT FAIR Corporate America!! Get the lawyers out of your heads and do what we (the consumers) want...rid the spyware!!!

Look Gentlemen. You are wasting your time. The Government will take over whether you like it or not. The spyware will be theirs. The so called war on terrorism will be the excuse. Remember there are madmen out there running around with weapons of Mass destruction who are responsible for the deaths of thousands of innocents. Luckily George Bush and Tony Blair will have to answer to God.

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.

in the past two years i've NEVER had spyware install after clicking ANY sort of "accept" button. i've NEVER had that option, usually it just installs after i visit the wrong sort of website.

a few public excecutions may send a good message to the likes of gator and xupiter

Sypware has become a huge problem for our staff - at home, as well as in the office. In the office we use Ad-Aware to scan for and remove spyware.(The personal version is used by some at home, also.)Of course, if we remove all items carte blanche, we could potentially lose legitimate cookies. However, the potential for system slow down and the unwanted tracking of information is by far the greater evil.

LICEWARE (a.k.a. "adware") doesn't try to hurt or kill you or others like a virus, but it does resemble a parasite like LICE because they are extremely annoying and you have to go to extreme meausres to get rid of them once infected.

The people who write this software should be prosecuted as criminals for the lost productivity and aggravation their software causes, not to mention possibly opening still more security holes through which other unwanted invasions could occur.

I realize that such legislation would possibly set a precedent that could be used for more governmental regulation, but in this case we'd have to weigh the lesser of two evils. My opinion is currently tilted toward the threat of criminal action for writing LICEWARE.

Feel free to present evidence that might change my mind.

Outside of running AdAware on desktops to remove spyware, I have never seen a problem across a couple of networks I manage that can't be simply detected and removed as data miners etc by AdAware.

I write up very strict user policies, NO online email services are alowed at all (hotmail, MSN etc) NO chat software whatsoever is allowed to be installed, nosurfing unless to customer or work related sites. Computer at people's homes are for that junk, not a company network.

If a few things are picked up, very rarely, I just remote in to the desktops and do an inventory of installed apps. If I see, MSN or W.H.Y., I remove it and notify thier employer of the policy breach. From that point it is out of my hands and up to the employer. If the employer doesn't do anything about it and ends up paying me $150.00/hr to do an onsite cleanup, it doesn't take too many invoices before they start acting upon your notifications.

if the employee is bummed, they have the rules, they broke the rules and maybe next time they will think twice before installing MSN chat on thier next employers computer.

It sounds a little harsh, but when a company invests tens or hundreds of thousands inthier network and some $20/hr employee screws it up and costs the company 150/hr, they deserve to be unemployed. There a plenty of others that will do the same job without compromising the company's investment.

So beyond that, I see no need for regulation outside of the company.

If you can't train staff and enforce policies, you shouldn't be in business in 2004.

Why should we let someone else to do something about it when we can take care of this at the company level, which differs by each company involved?

Spyware or Spam? - Sounds the same to me. Both end up on your computer without your wanting it to be there. They both demand time; both in ascertaining what it is and its removal. Both can be a pain in the rear, if not impossible (for some) to get rid of. I'd almost rather be invaded by aliens, but then I'll be careful what I ask for.

And, oh, I'm sorry, a little off key, but I'm paying money for a piece of software I've really been wanting, only to find out I have to click cancel because I'm not willing to agree with Part 3 Sub-Section 2c of the User Agreement? Now, because I don't want this "extra fluff", er, "stuff", I have to go take it back? Something is seriously wrong with that.

Leave it to the government to create "make work", based upon the doctrine of the military. As if it is not enough to have to deal with change and security at the same time ... now let stir up the pot and have our own side "whitehats" act stupid ! Lead, follow or get the hell out of the way.