The Federal Trade Commission is planning to crack down on bloggers who review or promote products while earning freebies or payments, the Associated Press reported Sunday.
This would, for the first time, bring bloggers under FTC guidelines that ban deceptive or unfair business practices.
"New guidelines, expected to be approved late this summer with possible modifications, would clarify that the agency can go after bloggers--as well as the companies that compensate them--for any false claims or failure to disclose conflicts of interest," the article explained.
The rules could be quite strict, even extending to the practice of affiliate links--for example, a music blogger who links to a song on Amazon MP3 or iTunes that earns an affiliate commission in the process.
The practice of free products for bloggers, most of whom are not bound by ethical guidelines that journalists have historically followed, has been making headlines for some time now. Microsoft, for example, created a wave of bad press a few years ago when it gave free Acer laptops preloaded with Windows Vista to several dozen bloggers.
Some companies have sprung up around the whole notion of blogger compensation and giveaways. The AP article mentions some of the marketing companies that have made a business out of offering bloggers incentives--free trips, products, gift certificates, or outright payments--for coverage. One of them, Izea, has been generating controversy in the tech press since it started PayPerPost.
Izea says that it requires bloggers to disclose what they've gotten paid for or what they've received for free. But with the proposed FTC guidelines, if a blogger fails to disclose a freebie or payment, both Izea and the blogger could be held responsible. The FTC could also take issue with the fact that for at least one promotion, Izea has said it avoided including bloggers who would be likely to give the company negative press.
Izea CEO Ted Murphy wrote in a blog post Monday that the company supports stricter FTC regulations for bloggers.
"The companies that should be worried about these changes are those that have no standards and no way to enforce disclosure," Murphy wrote. "We have invested millions of dollars creating systems that allow us to automate transactions and verify standardized disclosure."
But some bloggers, the AP article mentioned, are concerned that the FTC's efforts could go too far, possibly generating probes into posts that were written without any compensation, and possibly leading bloggers to post with more restraint. And some believe it would be better if bloggers created their own standards based on niche and industry.
Then there's this: does the FTC realize just how many small-time bloggers are out there? Championing business ethics is a worthy goal, but, um, good luck getting much done when there are hundreds of thousands of blogs out there and new ones popping up more or less daily. Ever heard of the expression "herding cats?"
This post was updated at 11:37 a.m. PT with comment from Izea.
A U.S. District Court refused to impose an outright ban on the sale of RemoteSpy keylogger spyware, but the court has barred its parent company from marketing the product for deceptive purposes while it considers a complaint from the FTC that the software may violate the FTC Act.
The U.S. District Court for the Middle District of Florida, Orlando Division, had previously issued a temporary restraining order against Florida-based CyberSpy Software, halting the sales of RemoteSpy. However, the court on November 25 issued a more narrowly tailored preliminary injunction (PDF).
CyberSpy altered the RemoteSpy Web site to comply with the injunction, and as of December 3, RemoteSpy was once again available for sale and users could access their accounts.
The Federal Trade Commission filed a complaint (PDF) against CyberSpy Software on November 5, alleging the company has violated the FTC Act by selling software that can be deployed remotely by someone other than the owner or authorized user of a computer, can be installed without the owner's knowledge, and can used to surreptitiously collect and disclose personal information. The FTC also claims CyberSpy unfairly collected and stored personal information gathered with RemoteSpy.
The commission asked the court to permanently ban the sale of RemoteSpy and require CyberSpy to pay restitution for any injury to consumers resulting from violations of the FTC Act.
The preliminary injunction, in place while the FTC's case against CyberSpy is pending, orders the company and its CEO Tracer Spence to stop promoting, selling, or distributing RemoteSpy by "suggesting to customers that it may be, or is intended to be, surreptitiously installed on a computer without the knowledge or consent of the computer's owner." The defendants are also barred from providing others with the means to falsely represent a keylogger program as an innocuous file, such as photos or music.
"RemoteSpy is designed to be installed without the knowledge or consent of the owner or authorized user of a computer, and defendants' marketing touts this function," the court stated in its injunction. "In light of these marketing efforts, the potential for devastating abuse far outweighs the possibility of benign use."
CyberSpy is seeking to dismiss the entire lawsuit.
"The FTC claims our software should be illegal because someone, somewhere might abuse it," Spence said in a release, "but computer monitoring software is just like any other surveillance technology: There is nothing inherently illegal about binoculars, hidden cameras, or directional microphones, for example, but people can use those tools to break the law."
A U.S. District Court has temporarily halted the sale of RemoteSpy keylogger spyware at the request of the Federal Trade Commission, which claims the software violates the FTC Act.
The FTC filed a complaint (PDF) against Florida-based CyberSpy Software on November 5, alleging the company has violated the FTC Act by selling software that can be deployed remotely by someone other than the owner or authorized user of a computer, can be installed without the owner's knowledge, and can used to surreptitiously collect and disclose personal information. The FTC also claims CyberSpy unfairly collected and stored personal information gathered with RemoteSpy.
In its complaint, the FTC asked the U.S. District Court for the Middle District of Florida, Orlando Division, to issue a temporary restraining order halting the sale of RemoteSpy while its case is pending, permanently ban the sale of RemoteSpy, and require CyberSpy to pay restitution for any injury to consumers resulting from its violations of the FTC Act.
The court, in its temporary restraining order filed November 6 against CyberSpy, said there is a "substantial likelihood" that the FTC will be able to prove the spyware maker violated the FTC Act.
"The sale and operation of RemoteSpy is likely to cause substantial harm to consumers that cannot be reasonably avoided and is not outweighed by countervailing benefits to consumers or to competition," the court wrote. "The likely harm includes financial harm (including identity theft) and endangering the health and safety of consumers."
Along with barring CyberSpy from selling RemoteSpy, the restraining order bars the company from disclosing or making available any information obtained through the software. It also requires CyberSpy to ensure any Web sites associated with the product, including www.remotespy.com, are not publicly accessible.
The FTC's complaint names Tracer R. Spence, the registered agent and manager of CyberSpy, as liable for the charges against the spyware maker.
CyberSpy's possible violations were first brought to light to the FTC in a complaint (PDF) filed in March by the Electronic Privacy Information Center.
Though other federal agencies have been known to use keylogger software, the FTC has been challenging the distribution of spyware for the past four years.
WASHINGTON--The potential applications for radio frequency identification are about as far-reaching and unforeseeable as its privacy and security implications.
Industry representatives, government officials, and consumer advocates met at a workshop on Tuesday hosted by the Federal Trade Commission to discuss how to resolve privacy and security concerns with respect to RFID without stifling the growth of the technology.
"Our discomfort stems from the fact that strong security is not always built into the (RFID technology) to begin with," said Susan Grant, director of consumer protection for the Consumer Federation of America. "Very often, it's an afterthought."
Industry, government, and public advocacy representatives discussed RFID technology Tuesday.
(Credit: Stephanie Condon/CNET Networks)There were security and privacy concerns when the U.S. government began issuing RFID-equipped passports. Evolving private-sector use, such as the migration of contactless payment to mobile phones, has also raised concerns.
Industry representatives, however, said the state of the technology made it difficult to anticipate security weaknesses. Furthermore, they warned, trying to impose broad security standards on the many uses of RFID technology could severely hamper its growth.
"Is it too early for a recommendation for a technology that is still evolving?" asked Paul Skehan, director of the European Retail Round Table. "Probably."
All the participants at the workshop agreed on the need to educate the public about how RFID technology is used.
"If the public's not ready for it, that could kill a technology," said Tom Karygiannis, senior researcher at the National Institute of Standards and Technology.
The European Union Commission is currently preparing a recommendation for member states on how to address privacy, data protection, and information security when implementing RFID technology. In the United States, the FTC is not pursuing any new policies or encouraging any new legislation to address RFID privacy issues because the FTC Act provides a broad mandate that allows for those issues to be addressed, said Katie Ratte, an FTC attorney.
- prev
- 1
- next
