Spyware Act has detractors
A bill to curb those activities is before Gov. Olene Walker, but representatives of several tech industry groups on Thursday urged her to veto it. They contend that HB323, the Spyware Control Act, will actually unintentionally hurt both consumers and businesses.
HB323 makes it illegal to create or install spyware, which is software that monitors Internet activity and sends that information elsewhere, usually without the user being aware of it or consenting to it.
But the tech groups contend the definition of spyware under the bill is too broad.
Steve DelBianco, vice president of public policy for the Association for Competitive Technology, consisting mostly of smaller information technology companies, said something indeed needs to be done to stop spyware from sneaking into computers and collecting information that is relayed and to stop spyware from being so difficult to remove from computers.
"Spyware is a legitimate concern, but this bill is just a wrong way to go," he said.
The group representatives said HB323 is well-meaning in aiming to cure some ills, but they want to work with the governor and legislative leaders to develop alternatives. Plus, they said, the federal government is looking into the matter.
Utah, he said, is the first state to pass such a law, but the state is "moving too far without looking at what the issues are." He's afraid the bill will become a model for other states to follow.
The bill was prompted by Draper-based 1-800 Contacts Inc.'s problems with other companies' pop-up ads when people tried to access the company's Web site. The pop-ups looked as if they were generated by 1-800 Contacts but instead represented competition.
The tech group reps said the bill could result in:
• Parents being less effective at controlling Internet content seen by their children. Parental control software would be spyware, and the bill would create liability for providers of filtering software, they said, adding that HB323 conflicts with other legislation that requires public libraries to use filtering software to block pornographic Web sites in order to get state funds.
• Criminals being aware of any law enforcement attempts to monitor their illegal online activity and disabling that monitoring.
• Companies being unable to send out targeted pop-up ads, the revenues from which some companies use to provide free content to computer users.
You can be the first to comment on this story.