From: "Rob Weir" <[email protected]>
On Thu, Aug 16, 2012 at 8:40 PM, Tamblyne <[email protected]> wrote:
On 8/15/2012 9:06 PM, Rob Weir wrote:
On Wed, Aug 15, 2012 at 4:28 PM, Tamblyne<[email protected]> wrote:
On 8/2/2012 11:31 AM, Rob Weir wrote:
On Thu, Aug 2, 2012 at 11:50 AM, David H. Lipman<[email protected]>
wrote:
From: "Anastasia Cher"<[email protected]>
Hello there,
I didn't know where to email, so I decided to just email to you. I
just
want to tell that there is an issue, some website
www.*openoffice*.fm/suitepretends that its you. When I googled Open
Office it was the first website
in research so I just clicked and downloaded what they offered. The
say
that it's an Open Office suit. When I finished and installed it, I
had
lots
of bugs and staff but no office. So I don't know, but these guys are
using
your name for scam.
This is going on for numerous software from Adobe Reader to VLC Media
Player.
Right. This is how it seems to work:
1) They buy advertisements on Google and Bing and spam social
networks, offering OpenOffice,Free Office and similar keywords. These
lure users into going to their page.
2) The pick URL's and brand the site in a way that makes it look
official.
3) To download OpenOffice you need to use their special "downloader"
tool. The main purpose of the downloader tool is to install other
unrelated applications onto your system. It may or may not then
install OpenOffice.
4) These other applications are sponsored apps, meaning another
company is paying for these applications to be promoted. That is the
source of revenue for the websites that do this.
I did a blog post on this:
http://blogs.apache.org/OOo/entry/how_to_safely_download_apache
Note: Users are not powerless. There are places to report such
issues. Some are listed in the blog post.
Regards,
-Rob
Users aren't powerless, but too many of them just don't pay attention.
I
pulled up your blog post to see if you addressed the easiest "clue" --
for
me, anyway -- the URL itself and I see you do mention it, but maybe it
could
be more directly stated.
*Any* URL that ends in a dot other than COM or ORG or NET should be
suspect
and probably shouldn't be clicked on at all. The ".fm" in the URL the
poster provided is a dead giveaway. Most of your suggestions of things
to
watch out for require the user to actually visit the page first, and
too
many times it's already too late after that's been done.
I think that another issue is that users are not very Google (or Bing)
savvy. They don't all know about sponsored links in search results,
especially when they appear on top. They have in mind what they are
searching for, and naturally gravitate toward the top listing. Subtle
shading or small print does not cause them to slow down and even check
the URL.
It always frustrates me that in these "modern times" so much time is
spent
cleaning up messes in the wake of these unethical people -- thieves and
liars. I have no use for them.
For instance, I'm sure it took you a fair bit of time to write that
blog
post -- which is very helpful. Unfortunately, I would guess that a
vast
majority of the people who need that knowledge won't find it until
*after*
they've been screwed and go to try to find out why.
True. But it does have some value for us to articulate what we
consider to be acceptable and unacceptable. As open source software
we tread a narrow line. We're open as a matter of principle, and from
a copyright perspective our license allows anyone to copy the software
for any purpose. But that is only with respect to copyright.
Trademark use is an entirely different beast, and no one is given
permission to use our trademark in a way that confuses or harms our
users.
If we were a big corporation we'd have legions of attorneys at our
call to apply their special powers of persuasion to remedy this. But
we're a non-profit, relying on volunteers. So the emphasis
necessarily focuses on user education. We're not the only product
that runs into this problem. Many of the popular open source apps
have the same issues, like 7-ZIP and VLC Player. It comes
hand-in-hand with popularity. No one tries to misuse trademarks of
unpopular programs.
-Rob
I definitely agree with what you say, and am familiar with the issues.
It's
only that the horse will have already left the barn before the people who
really need that info will find it.
Any suggestions for how we could do this better?
The one thing we're not able to do is go out, guns blazing, with cease
and desist orders and DMCA take-downs, etc. We're not a big
corporation.
One idea -- more of a dream than a plan -- is to contact other open
source projects who face similar issues, and work together to raise
recognition of the issue, educate users, but also push for less
expensive routes for non-profits to raise complaints in these areas.
You can use the DMCA route. You don't have to be a big entity. The right
is afforded to an individual or organization. Just file it with the hoster
of the content.
The second option of joining forces with other affected authors/software
publishers can be done as well.
--
Dave
Multi-AV Scanning Tool - http://multi-av.thespykiller.co.uk
http://www.pctipp.ch/downloads/dl/35905.asp
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: [email protected]
For additional commands, e-mail: [email protected]
