Re: Court: Pop-ups burden of Net

[Data64]

"James E. Morrow" <jamesemorrow@email.com> wrote in
news:Xns93F1548C993jemorrowemailcom@205.188.138.16 1:

> At least one U.S. Federal Court has decided that spyware is legal.
>
> http://news.com.com/2100-1024-507266...t=dtx&tag=ntop
>
> While I am not surprised, I find the court's opinion unappealing.
>
>

Same story covered by different news sites
http://www.techdirt.com/articles/200...138247_F.shtml

I tend to agree with the judgement, otherwise using Proxo/Privoxy and hosts
file to block ads could also be construed to be infringing on UHaul's
website copyright.

Now if someone went after WhenU and Gator saying they tricked the end-user
into installing the software, that would be a totally different thing.

data64

[Randall Bart]

'Twas 9 Sep 2003 13:13:54 GMT when all alt.privacy.spyware stood in awe as
Data64 <me@privacy.net> uttered:

>I tend to agree with the judgement, otherwise using Proxo/Privoxy and hosts
>file to block ads could also be construed to be infringing on UHaul's
>website copyright.
>
>Now if someone went after WhenU and Gator saying they tricked the end-user
>into installing the software, that would be a totally different thing.

I agree. U-Haul's case was far fetched, but WhenU and Gator are scum, and
need to be sued by the users who didn't know they volunteered to use their
crap.
--
RB |\ © Randall Bart
aa |/ admin@RandallBart.spam.com Barticus@att.spam.net
nr |\ Please reply without spam I LOVE YOU 1-917-715-0831
dt ||\ http://RandallBart.com/ Ånåheim Ångels 2002 World Chåmps!
a |/ Multiple sclerosis: http://www.cbc.ca/webone/alison/
l |\ DOT-HS-808-065 The Church Of The Unauthorized Truth:
l |/ MS^7=6/28/107 http://yg.cotut.com mailto:s@cotut.com

[Tim Smith]

In article <Xns93F15DC81386CData64Bigfootcom@130.133.1.4>, Data64 wrote:
> I tend to agree with the judgement, otherwise using Proxo/Privoxy and
> hosts file to block ads could also be construed to be infringing on
> UHaul's website copyright.

Yup (mostly). The issue was whether WhenU's software infringed UHaul's
rights. The decision was correct.

> Now if someone went after WhenU and Gator saying they tricked the end-user
> into installing the software, that would be a totally different thing.

Yup again, assuming that "someone" is the end user. UHaul would probably
not have standing to go after WhenU and Gator for that.

--
Evidence Eliminator is worthless: www.evidence-eliminator-sucks.com
--Tim Smith