These advertising tactics don't sit well with Eric L. Howes

From the December 2004 issue of PC World magazine

 

I'll stick out my neck here a bit. A hard sell is a hard sell is a hard sell....

What is ethical in one industry cannot be unethical in another. IMO, there can't be a set of standards for doctors, another for lawyers, and another for computer folks. Medical ethics, legal ethics, computer ethics? C'mon. Ethics is ethics and it matters little what industry is involved.

What some anti-spyware companies do is not bad per se, much less unethical. In fact, I'd even have to say its brilliant!

Imagine a pharmaceutical selling "statins" putting up a booth manned by licensed medical personnel in a fair and rendering free blood pressure checkups for people. Hypertensives are then referred to a company sposored physician who offers free trial doses of medication sold by the pharmaceutical company (this is fairly common in Asia). The point being that the analogy is a hardsell, too. Yet, the latter is ethical and even considered beneficial.

Closer to home, imagine what Panda, and Housecall are doing. Free virus scans. Are they unethical? Not by a long shot! It's even a valued service.

However, when these Anti-spyware companies do not give a surfer proper opt-out alternatives, the situation becomes unethical. Freedom of choice has always been a cherished right since the Garden of Eden. When people are goaded into purchasing their products because they have been misled by FP detections, or when malware are piggy-backed with the downloaded trialware, then the method becomes unacceptable....

 

IMO still longhorn hit on a few very valid points of interest......its the wild, wild west on the internet...no law "OF ORDER" ........an like the old folks use to say: "the pot calling the kettle"

I don't see alot of people jumping around hollaring about the no-ethics of microsoft...........its not possible to purchase a microsoft that does not have spware installed.......on top of this microsoft as was proven in federal court is very un-truthful about its products..........an even its security patches are flawed.......so where are the ethics........they don't exist!

This girls and boys is where the major issues are.......the playing field is not level.......it leans in favor of the black hats and dishonest vendors software vendors...................how many black hats go to jail.......they messa-up hundreds of thousands of computers..,..with stuff likwe coolweb....an whats the re-action...."gee..doh...we can locate the owners"


good golly mis molly..... the law enforcement of several countries can't locate the coolweb server.......come on now.....be for real! The information collected by spyware is going somewhere.....an it should be childs play to locate those servers and prosecute the black hat spyware vendor....
ethical standards simply do not exist......the laws are already in place....

but how can the laws be enforce when doing so who cause major software vendors billions.......its just not going to happen......
there can not be a set of standards for one vendor........an another set of standards for yet another vendor......an yet an entirely other set of standards for the public............but thats how it is

 

the laws are already in place....- the Snowman

Too many laws. Too little enforcement... How do you enforce US laws against somebody in Asia? or Russia? Or Eastern Europe?

 

Nearly every country in the world has extradition laws....agreeing to give up criminals to stand trial...................a computer hacked in england by someone in the US.....can have the hacker extradited to england.........such extraditions have existed for many years.......rarely used.

There are global agreements on law enforcement......long has gone the days when a criminal could evade punishment by crossing boarders......