Proposed spyware bill seeks penalties

An anti-spyware proposal moving rapidly through the U.S. House of Representatives now has some competition. The new bill, called the Internet Spyware Prevention Act and introduced Thursday, veers in a completely different direction than a competing measure that the House Energy and Commerce Committee has approved.

Instead of trying to define what computer software should or shouldn't do, the ISPA instead says it's illegal to install software "without authorization" if it leaks personal information or "impairs" a computer's security. Unlike the Commerce proposal, it includes criminal penalties of up to two years in prison. It's sponsored by Bob Goodlatte, R-Va., Zoe Lofgren, D-Calif., and Lamar Smith, R-Tex.

[unknown unknown]

I wonder if they've ever heard of something called EULA.

In most cases the spyware or adware is mentioned in EULA followed a statement that basicly says, if you continue with the installation you're giving the company that makes the software permission to install the spyware and/or adware. I think the effectiveness of this law will come down to what constitutes permission.

[Charlief1]

Not strong enough

Any remedy that addresses this problem is welcome. I work on an excellent corporate helpdesk and have found spyware to be outrageously invasive, difficult-to-impossible to remove, and expensive for all affected parties. One problem I see in the story is that word "if". There should be NO situation where ANY software is allowed to be installed on someone's machine without their informed and express consent, and security has nothing to do with it. There should be an extremely low tolerance level for this crap.