Comments on: Washington state sues over spyware

Microsoft joins state lawmakers in filing suit against a software maker they say preyed on people's fears to sell a fake security tool.

[heystoopid]

Question?

Question, why was th attorney general so slow, to enforce this legislation when it was first enacted in law! What a slacker!!!!!!

Perhaps, he was spurred on by the SONY audio cd's illegal trojanware debacle?

[csturdivant]

Evidence

Easy, evidence. If you want to win a case, you need evidence...and getting evidence and other useful information takes time.

Another misleading headline

Once again CNET posts another completely misleading headline, This article is about Washington state suing a spyware cleaner, which doesn't clean spyware, and has dubious marketing methods. This article has NOTHING to do with a spyware maker.

I hope no one gets paid to come up with these headlines.

[someguy389]

Not quite so...

The implication here is that the software's status is dubious at best. While it doesn't eliminate spyware from systems as it claims, it also modifies settings to allow future attacks. Whether that qualifies it as spyware or not is up for debate, but there is certainly more to the story than the software simply not doing the thing it is marketed to do.

[KarenSaid]

Headline query

Thanks for your comment. We're taking your concern into account and tweaking the headline.

[Julie Allen]

Why are you so jumpy?

only people that are guilty of some wrong doing press the issue(s) like you have.

Hmm???

[Anon-Y-mous]

Should sue their own first--MSFT root cause

If MSFT didn't allow these "ads" to take over your machine (let alone allow the spyware to get on their in the first place) then this "company" wouldn't have done what it did.

Break up microsoft now!

[TMB333]

I disagree, partially...

If Microsoft's software was 100% bulletproof, as you are implying it should be, then yes, the Company accused of this wrongdoing would NOT have been able to do what they did in 'this case'. However, that doesn't necessarily mean that the Company just wouldn't have found some other means to dupe a lot of people out of their money.

Of course, you could ALSO look at this issue from another point of view. People should thank Microsoft for not having 100% bulletproof software, because think of ALL of the people that are currently employed by Virus Scanning Companies, Spyware/Adware Cleaning Companies, Software Security Companies, etc. Who knows what manner of potentially illegal activities they might have been getting into otherwise! (NOTE: This last comment is COMPLETELY sarcastic so don't bother getting all bent out of shape about it)

[neofight]

I disagree, completely

Listen - I don't take everything Microsoft shoves out there as gospel. Any responsible computer user should be constantly weighing their options and use the software that provides them with the least threat. This often means using tools other than what MS packages with their OS at your own discression.

That said - breaking up microsoft has absolutely nothing to do with this story. Microsoft puts a browser out there for people to use by default. Use something else if you feel vulnerable by what they provide. I award you no points, and may god have mercy on your soul.