"Willondon" <willondon@dsisp.net> wrote in message
news:fl0tlvc7tlb4ulil998g4thdrrgdhifqtj@4ax.com...
> Data64 wrote:
> > [...]
> > 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.
>
> Distasteful as the judgement is, I have to agree with you.
>
> > 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.
>
> That's really the heart of the matter. But where's the line between the
> user being tricked, and the user just being clueless and indiscriminate in
> their software installation?
>
> Even though most of us have installed software without reading through the
> text that accompanies the "OK" or "I Agree" button, I'd like to see at
> least a case against spyware distributors who do nasty things that were
> not mentioned in the pre-installation text available.
>
> Probably the most objectionable thing about the judgement was the comment
> that pop-ups *and spam* are a burden of using the Internet. I don't see
> pop-ups or get my browser hijacked because I'm prudent. I *do* get plenty
> of spam, and careful as I am, it's mostly because I choose to use email.
>
> I don't think it was fair for the judge to make that comment, and think it
> possibly reveals some technological ignorance which we can only hope did
> not cloud his judgement in this case.
>
> --
> Willondon

There is one way to change this judges mind. HACKER!! Surely he has a
system at home. It would be funny to see his reaction if all of a sudden
his system was inundated with SPAM and Popups!!