RSSFTC May Shame Adware Advertisers
By Ed Oswald | Published February 10, 2006, 11:16 AM
The U.S. Federal Trade Commission is considering using humiliation as a tactic in deterring companies from using adware as a means to advertise their products, a commissioner said Thursday.
The comments came from Commissioner Jon Leibowitz at an event held by the Anti-Spyware coalition in Washington, D.C. There, Leibowitz said in an interview with CNET News.com that he felt such a program would be effective in curbing the ever-growing problem of adware.
The term "adware" refers to hidden programs that pop up ads, usually based on a user's search or web browsing habits.
The advertisers would be added to a public list of companies who support adware, and Leibowitz said he would recommend going even further and publicly humiliating companies who do not stop.
While some applaud the move, others question it, pointing to the fact that some companies who advertise through adware may not know their advertising is appearing in such a fashion.
"Some affiliates cause merchants' ads to cover competitors' sites -- a merchant's ad might appear through spyware without the merchant knowing about, intending, or requesting this result," spyware expert Ben Edelman has said.
He has suggested that companies need to become more diligent and aware of whom and where their online advertising dollars are being used. The "intermediaries" are the ones to blame -- as they are allowing the advertising to be used in such a manner.
Such a plan would require the approval of the full FTC before taking effect, however looking at previous statements from other commissioners it appears that the agency may be prepared to take such drastic measures.
Close one door, open another. Something else -probably worse- will popup.
Score: 0
|No pun intended?
Score: 0
|Humiliate them? While we're at it lets take it up a notch, and call them "BIG POOPY HEADS" -
Yeah that'll learn'em. >:)
Score: 0
|Thank you FTC in advance of you humiliating MSN Messenger and the companies who advertise with it. :P
Score: 0
|MSN Messenger is not adware -.-
Score: 0
|"The term "adware" refers to hidden programs that pop up ads, usually based on a user's search or web browsing habits."
um...Spyware, you mean?
Idiots.
Adware refers to programs that are supported by ads. Programs that explicitly inform you such activity is necessary to continue to provide free use of said softwares. Nothing illicit going on, nothing the user is un-aware of.
Spyware is the hidden program that tracks usage and displays pop-ups.
Yes, lets confuse the issue even more, here, by swapping terminology and make a perfectly legitimate and useful practice sound *EVIL!!!*
Again, for effect:
Idiots.
Score: 0
|LOL your funny too tho. spyware usually doesnt pop up ads, since then users would realize they have spyware on their computer.
"Adware refers to programs that are supported by ads" your so dumb... here i got the definition for you from wikipedia:
"Adware or advertising-supported software is any software package which automatically plays, displays, or downloads advertising material to a computer after the software is installed on it or while the application is being used."
now you are the idiot. HA. HA.
Score: 0
|http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Spyware
"For instance, some attackers used the W32.Spybot.Worm worm to install spyware that popped up pornographic ads on the infected system's screen."
Nope?
Score: 0
|I would like to point out, that while you must include declaration of the Adware when installing, many software companies hide it in the EULA...
and tell me, who, out of common users, reads EULAs? Hell, I can barely understand that legal s***...
Spyware and Adware are often mixed as well...
Adware is just that, displays ads... Spyware is just that, spies... however, some products are both :)
Score: 0
|To me it all belongs in the toilet.
Score: 0
|Why do you think I called it Legal sh!t? :P
Score: 0
|"spyware usually doesnt pop up ads"
Yeah, cuz then they'd...make money?
"Adware or advertising-supported software is any software package which automatically plays, displays, or downloads advertising material to a computer after the software is installed on it or while the application is being used."
Zactly! Good Job Cutting and Pasting.
DId you bother to READ it? Did it say anything about tracking usage? How about installing without user knowledge? No?
Now lookup spyware, genius.
Score: 0
|Programs that install adware with no notification are still adware...just the bad kind. ;)
Opera wouldn't be here now if it wasn't for adware. Many other good programs were born thanks to adware. Yeah, it ain't fun, but if they do it right, it can be liveable.
Recently, AutoGK, a DVD-AVI conversion prorgam that had been freeware for a good deal of time decided to put some crap adware in the install.
...small tag-on to the end of an otherwise unchanged EULA (If you'd read it before on a previous version, you'd not notice any change in the first few pages, so why bother?). No mention of it anywhere in the program. And every time someone asked on the forum about it(the only place you'd hear about it unless you anti-spyware prgram nailed it), the thread got closed and buried.
Thankfully, they learned their lesson and are now adware-freee again. That's an example of how it *doesn't* work.
Could it have worked? Should it? Hell yeah. Le0X has done a *damn* good job on that piece of software. Had it been done honestly and overtly, people would have had a lot less trouble accepting it.
Score: 0
|hahah yes make fun of them!!... they prolly wouldnt care...just more advertizement LOL
Score: 0
|There's an old adage (not entirely incorrect): "Any advertising is good advertising."
Score: 0
|This is the same as the sweatshop situation. What should be done is if a company employs sweatshop workers, the government should expose them and let the public choose not to purchase from them. Same thing here. Let the FTC tell the public who employs unethical advertising techniques and let the consumer have the right to say "I don't wish to do business with people who function in this manner."
Not that complicated.
Score: 0
|What a stupid idea. These companies are incapable of feeling shame, and even if they are, they don’t care just as long as they’re making money. And how are you going to shame them, by making a web site? BFD, like anyone cares, or is even going to visit it, much less even know about it.
Score: 0
|Shaming them? This may or may not open up a can of worms.
Lawsuit possibilities?
Score: 0
|You can't sue the government..haha. Its perfect!
Score: 0
|Bill gates did, and the government lost :P
Score: 0
|Yet he still doesn't have the car. ;-)
Score: 0
|Actually, he got it already ....
on 17 October 2005 ....
( his famous 959 )
along with Paul Allen, and Ralph Lauren
Score: 0
|Did he? I missed that article somehow. Last I read he was still fighting to get it.
Hey, check that out how in the world did I miss that?!
:-)
Score: 0
|You can... but the FTC is doing the right thing, so they'll win for sure if anyone tries.
I say... advertise this "which product is spyware" website on every TV network in the world ^_^ Perhaps even name a few of them in the "comerical"
Score: 0
|