|
|
Difference of opinion...
I feel that accessing information stored in publicly available fields is a far cry from breaking in -- a better analogy, in my opinion, is that I know you stole something, so I used the information in the Yellow Pages to locate you.
Publicly Available?
Nothing on my computer is "publicly available". If I go to my bank and withdraw all of my money in cash, then leave that cash on my front door step, you have still committed a crime by taking it. I may have been foolish in leaving it there, but you have no right to it. Any information available to programs through OS X API's is for programmers to facilitate MY use of that information. I have agreed to NO contract which allows that information to be accessed by companies and/or programmers.
Difference of opinion...
There is absolutely nothing wrong with the accessing of publicly available information; however, the is nothing that assumes that a program's author may use that information. The insidious thing here is that that information is LEAVING my machine without my consent. It should be clear to a purchaser what a program is doing on his machine. The analogy is not using a phone book to look up a number, the analogy is digging through a person's personal papers that he left on his front porch to obtain an unlisted phone number. If he really only wants to stop piracy then he should clearly state that he will harvest this information so that we may choose not to use his software. I should never be denied of the choice to not distribute my personal information. I always pay for shareware and never pirate software, but I never register either. Once I buy a piece of software the seller has no right to know what I do with it.
Difference of opinion...
Publicly stored? I don't know what you consider "public", but the contents of my computer, whether protected from intrusion or not, are nobody's business. The fact that this software retrieves ANY data from my computer that I did not explicitly authorize is a clear invasion of privacy regardless of the reason it is done.
Difference of opinion...
In my opinion, this would be a legitimate difference of opinion if, when one downloads MaxMenus, they are explicitly told up front that the software includes spyware that sends identifying information to the developer in the event that an inappropriate serial number is entered. Then I as a software user have the option of downloading the software on that basis. Does MaxMenus include such a warning? If not, why not? That warning would actually prevent people from using the inappropriate serial number, which is the only laudable objective that the developer should have. On the other hand, explicitly concealing that the software includes spyware serves the additional goal of 'busting' people that use an illegal serial. THAT's the difference between "protecting ones interest" (warning users, so that the illegal serial is never used in the first place) and "vigilante-ism" (busting them). |
SearchFrom our Sponsor...Latest Mountain Lion HintsWhat's New:HintsNo new hintsComments last 2 daysLinks last 2 weeksNo recent new linksWhat's New in the Forums?
Hints by TopicNews from Macworld
From Our Sponsors |
|
Copyright © 2014 IDG Consumer & SMB (Privacy Policy) Contact Us All trademarks and copyrights on this page are owned by their respective owners. |
Visit other IDG sites: |
|
|
|
Created this page in 0.09 seconds |
|