Spyware Warrior

[Moore]

I didnt see this posted anywhere yet , so here goes..

Ad software maker sues distributors

http://news.zdnet.com/2100-9588_22-5836884.html

By Stefanie Olsen
August 17, 2005

An advertising-software maker that's long been in the crosshairs of anti-spyware groups is suing seven former distributors of its application in a continuing effort to clean up its image.

180solutions makes downloadable Internet software that delivers pop-up promotions to people as they perform Web searches; the application is often distributed by third parties.

The Bellevue, Wash.-based company filed a lawsuit this week in Washington's King County Superior Court against seven distributors or individuals, charging that they had installed its software on PCs without notifying the owner, nor obtaining his or her consent, against the company's policy.

"When we discover a partner in violation of our code, we shut them down and, when necessary, take legal action to avert future bad behavior," 180solutions President Daniel Todd said in a statement.

The lawsuits are 180solutions' latest attempt to start fresh in the ad software, or adware business, which has a sullied history. In the past, some adware pushers have buried download disclosures in lengthy legalese; installed software surreptitiously through security loopholes; disguised their brands; or made it tough for consumers to uninstall the pop-up programs.

Now companies including 180solutions are seeking to distance themselves from such practices. In addition to this week's complaint, 180solutions sued two former distributors of its software last year--a case that was settled in the company's favor. And 180 has severed relationships with another 500 of its 8,000 distributors since early this year.

It also recently sent pop-up alerts to its PC users, notifying them that its software was installed. However, some consumer advocates believe the company still hasn't gone far enough in its notification efforts. To be thorough, critics believe, the company should also get people's consent to continue running the software.

To secretly install the software, called 180search Assistant, the defendants allegedly used "botnets," or large computer networks that manipulate security holes in the Windows operating system to download viruses or malware, according to the filing. One person, the botnet operator, typically controls the distribution of harmful software or spam on a network of infected PCs.

180solutions seeks monetary damages in an amount to be determined at trial.
_________________
| Blockpost | Blocklist Pro Internet Security | BLM | Hosts |

[Recon Man]

Hello Moore ,

This news sounds okay, but I still think that anti-spyware makers will still have to keep detecting 180solutions until we see more changes; sort of like 180solutions making a 180 degree turn. They're moving in the right direction, though.

"Keep your friends close, but your enemies closer."

Michael Corleone to Frank Pantagelene in
The Godfather

Great post here Moore .

Best Regards,

Recon Man
_________________
Helping make Cyberspace a safer place.

[Sacha]

It's just good PR for 180solutions. "Oh, look! They're suing some people doing bad things!" Either way, 180 wants their software on as many machines as possible, and although they don't want to get into any legal trouble, a situation like this gives them a great opportunity to propagandize. It's like the CoolWebSearch statements on their website; they don't really mean anything. They just sound nice and trick the more gullible among us into thinking that CWS is a fair and decent organization.

180solutions is certainly incomparable to something like CWS, but this whole lawsuit situation is more PR than anything else. They just want to be loved .
_________________
----
For more information on protecting yourself from spyware, visit our educational blog: www.spywaredaily.com

[suzi]

[MadameX]

I think I can find better things to love.
_________________
CARMA

[Sacha]

Like marshmallows!

But seriously, companies like 180 and DirectRevenue want us to respect them, and maybe even leave them alone, just because they're tossing around rhetoric and lawsuits and phrases like "commitment to privacy." They actually have to DO SOMETHING if we're going to be persuaded, even a little bit.

Take a look at WhenU. They're making changes, doing good things, and they don't yet expect us to stop listing them. They just want a "fair shake," like one of their reps told me. And that seems pretty respectable.
_________________
----
For more information on protecting yourself from spyware, visit our educational blog: www.spywaredaily.com

[wyrmrider]

I wonder how many of the defendents still exist
If they were big revenue generators I would think there would have been negotiations
This is about PR not damages or estoppel
There may have been other practices which these defendants caused the light to be shown on themselves
Do we have a list of defendents? aka blocklist fodder?

wyrmrider

[herbalist]

It's entirely possible the whole thing is a PR stunt. What if these distributors are actually partners? They could use their own people for lawyers. It would be like taking from your left pocket and putting it in the right pocket. That way, the only real costs would be the court costs, but what a PR boost they'd get.
Think an adware company would stoop this low?
Rick

[Sacha]

I'm not sure if they'd go so far, but who knows? My brief communication with reps from 180solutions seemed open and honest, and I don't see them as a particularly sneaky company, but I do believe that this botnet situation is helping them garner some good PR, whether it's an elaborate plan or just a welcome opportunity.
_________________
----
For more information on protecting yourself from spyware, visit our educational blog: www.spywaredaily.com

[Scaramouche]

I think the larger question is, why do they have to sue so many of their distributors? Do they do any diligence whatsoever in determining that their agents are aboveboard? Why do other people have to police adware distribution networks in the first place? Isn't in the companies own best interests to ensure that they aren't dealing with scum?

Is it because the companies in fact don't care how the adware is distributed as long as they get x installs per month? I'm certainly starting to think that's the case. I have yet to hear of a single case of an adware manufacturer dropping a distributor based on their own investigations, though they may feel it's bad PR to publicize such a move. From what I can tell of the distribution networks (e.g. clickbank, various pyramid-like rackets) I've seen there is no way for an adware producer to even track exactly how their affiliates distribute the software. This means that they'll never have proactive control, and instead are forced to react when someone else catches them out.

They have no one to blame but themselves for creating a distribution system that rewards criminal behaviour, is impossible to directly control, and is merely difficult to monitor (when they bother). The only hyperbolic analogy I can think of is if cutco knives hired a convicted rapist as a door to door salesman, and then acted surprised that he raped his customers.
_________________
---
My comments represent my own opinions and research.