Webmaster Forum Rules | Posting Guide | Contact Us | Testimonials | Contributing Geek Program | Advertise on Geek/Talk
Welcome to the GeekTalk Webmaster Discussion Forums from GeekVillage.com

Click Here To Register. It's Free!

Go Back   geek/talk: Web publishing business discussion > YOUR PERFORMANCE: Website Promotion, Marketing and Growth > Business Principles > StopScum
User Name
Password
Register FAQ Calendar Search Today's Posts Mark Forums Read

Reply
 
Thread Tools Search this Thread Display Modes
Old 08-05-2005, 01:31 PM   #1
Steve_S
I am a Contributing Geek. Are You?
 
Steve_S's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 1998
Location: Las Vegas, Nevada, USA
Posts: 5,224
Arrow Advertising.com/John Ferber and SpyBlast

You broke my heart!

We grew up together and I never thought I would see this from YOU!

The Details: "Advertising.com Settles FTC Adware Charges

Free Software Advertised Security Benefits But Didn’t Disclose Bundled Adware

Advertising.com., Inc., now a subsidiary of America Online, Inc., has agreed to settle FTC charges that it violated federal law by offering free security software, but failing to disclose adequately that adware was bundled with that software. The settlement will require that the company clearly and prominently disclose adware bundled with software advertised to enhance security or privacy.

"The FTC complaint charged that Advertising.com, Inc., and its co-founder, John Ferber, distributed ads stating that because a consumer’s computer was broadcasting an Internet IP address, it was at risk from hackers. Consumers who clicked on one of the ads were shown an Active X “security warning” installation box, with a hyperlink describing SpyBlast as “Personal Computer Security and Protection Software from unauthorized users” and telling them, “once you agree to the License Terms and Privacy policy - click YES to continue.” The hyperlink did not indicate the nature and significance of the terms of the licensing agreement – namely that adware would be installed on their computers. Consumers were not required to read the agreement before installing the software. If consumers had read the agreement, they might have seen a statement saying that by accepting the software, they agreed to receive marketing messages, including pop-up ads, based on their Internet browsing habits."


Source: http://www.ftc.gov/opa/2005/08/spyblast.htm

The consent order which all parties signed:

http://www.ftc.gov/os/caselist/04231...ree0423196.pdf

This event occured prior to the AOL acquasition. AOL responds:

"An AOL spokesman said that Advertising.com had only been in the adware business for a brief period during 2003. The company makes most of its money by selling banner ads, spokesman Andrew Weinstein said.

"They were not in this business when we purchased them," Weinstein said. "Advertising.com does not now and will not in the future distribute adware products."

Source: http://today.reuters.com/news/NewsAr...SPYWARE-DC.XML

</sniffle>
Steve_S is offline   Reply With Quote
Reply

Bookmarks

Thread Tools Search this Thread
Search this Thread:

Advanced Search
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is Off
HTML code is Off
Forum Jump

Please support our advertisers. They ensure our survival.

All times are GMT -5. The time now is 08:06 PM.


GeekVillage.com is copyright © 1998-2015 Curiosity Cave - Science gifts for clever kids. All rights reserved.
Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.7.4
Copyright ©2000 - 2020, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.