HideOur Black Friday weekend sale ends tomorrow! Shop now to save on all Techdirt gear »
HideOur Black Friday weekend sale ends tomorrow! Shop now to save on all Techdirt gear »

Companies That Promised To Stop Advertising In Adware... Still Advertising In Adware

from the oops dept

Earlier this year, a bunch of companies paid some fines for advertising in various adware systems, and promised to stop doing so. While we weren't clear exactly why it was the advertisers fault that the adware companies did bad things in getting their adware installed, the fact that they said they would prevent future advertisements from appearing in adware seems reasonable. Unfortunately, it looks like it's not quite that easy. Spyware/adware researcher Ben Edelman has found that some of the companies that promised to stop advertising in adware still have ads showing up in these products. Edelman shows that both Cingular and Travelocity ads are still showing up (while Priceline ads have dropped) in certain adware products. While it likely does mean that through the convoluted ad network relationships that eventually lead to adware someone hasn't yet received the message to stop, it does raise another issue relating back to the question of why the advertisers were fined for this. If one of these adware companies wanted to get other companies in trouble... why not just put up "free" advertising for them, in order to get them sued by the New York Attorney General or the FTC (who has also looked at going after advertisers)?
Hide this

Thank you for reading this Techdirt post. With so many things competing for everyone’s attention these days, we really appreciate you giving us your time. We work hard every day to put quality content out there for our community.

Techdirt is one of the few remaining truly independent media outlets. We do not have a giant corporation behind us, and we rely heavily on our community to support us, in an age when advertisers are increasingly uninterested in sponsoring small, independent sites — especially a site like ours that is unwilling to pull punches in its reporting and analysis.

While other websites have resorted to paywalls, registration requirements, and increasingly annoying/intrusive advertising, we have always kept Techdirt open and available to anyone. But in order to continue doing so, we need your support. We offer a variety of ways for our readers to support us, from direct donations to special subscriptions and cool merchandise — and every little bit helps. Thank you.

–The Techdirt Team


Reader Comments

Subscribe: RSS

View by: Time | Thread


  • identicon
    Anonymous Jerk, 15 Mar 2007 @ 10:21am

    Breakdown of communications

    And lack of forethough, that is what is wrong with the court system.

    That and the fact that they don't fully understand technology.

    reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]

  • identicon
    Sanguine Dream, 15 Mar 2007 @ 10:33am

    Silly...

    I'm thinking the reason they are going after the advertisers and not the adware people themselves is because its probably easier to find and take action against a big company like Cingular than it is to dig for the hidden identity of the adware makers. Oh and chances are Cingular has more money too.

    Same reason that the parents of the girl that was assualted by the guy she met on MySpace tried to sue the social network instead of going after the guy that did it. MySpace or the assailant, who do you think has more money?

    reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]

  • identicon
    LinuxUser, 15 Mar 2007 @ 1:25pm

    Whats Adware?

    reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]

  • identicon
    just me, 15 Mar 2007 @ 5:23pm

    they should be sued and fined

    Those top CEO's know where their money is going, and how it is spent. They also know just how that money is spent in every detail. You don't own a company like Cingular unless you can produce the numbers to back up your claims to the investors. Cingular and other compaines are part of the spam problems online. They should force them all that spam to pay huge fines, and not be associated with the scumbags that spam, or put out adware. If they loose investors, and their stock drops then oh well, they should of known better. I have no sympathy for them, because they have none for me when I am cleaning up a computer after they have done their dirty work.

    reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]

  • identicon
    Enrico Suarve, 16 Mar 2007 @ 2:46am

    So fine them some more...

    Fining the companies who are advertising seems fair to me - let’s face it you are going to have a very hard time fining some of the adware 'companies' as they are often overseas in havens and often are just individuals with affiliations....

    The whole adware tree is massive and uncontrolled outsourcing at its worst. I pay you and you outsource to him who out sources to him, who affiliates to her, who affiliates to... etc

    Simple fact is that for investigators to follow the money would be expensive and why should the taxpayer pay for the original company’s lack of diligence?

    Let the company do the legwork if they want to pass on blame or sue onwards for damages - this works exactly the same as if I buy a product which is faulty, I don't return it to Sony - I return it to the store, who return it to their supplier, who return....

    If a company really cared it would have clauses in their advertising contracts stating the onwards affiliation was only allowed to a depth of x and that their adverts may not be served via adware. The contracts would stipulate that any further outsourcing of the contract must carry the same conditions. This is fairly normal in above board outsourcing and often you experience contracts which state NO further outsourcing may be done without express permission of the hiring company

    Want to bet AT&T/Cingular don't care enough to have put the above in place?

    If fining the original advertiser is such an unreasonable, unpractical approach how come Priceline ads have disappeared and Cingular’s have not? It works for one but the other finds it impossible?

    Or is it just that one of them cares more than the other about their image since they are less of a monopoly

    According to the report the fines paid were a small fraction of the original estimated advertising cost, perhaps the solution is to ensure that in future they more or less match?

    As #5 states I have no sympathy for them, because they have none for me when I am cleaning up a computer after they have done their dirty work

    reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]


Add Your Comment

Have a Techdirt Account? Sign in now. Want one? Register here



Subscribe to the Techdirt Daily newsletter




Comment Options:

  • Use markdown. Use plain text.
  • Remember name/email/url (set a cookie)

Close

Add A Reply

Have a Techdirt Account? Sign in now. Want one? Register here



Subscribe to the Techdirt Daily newsletter




Comment Options:

  • Use markdown. Use plain text.
  • Remember name/email/url (set a cookie)

Follow Techdirt
Special Affiliate Offer

Essential Reading
Techdirt Insider Chat
Recent Stories

This site, like most other sites on the web, uses cookies. For more information, see our privacy policy. Got it
Close

Email This

This feature is only available to registered users. Register or sign in to use it.