🚀 go-pugleaf

Hi

And I suppose you should also blacklist IBM and it's RSU facility.


Cheers
Helen

Stan wrote:
> 
> To All,
> 
> I sent an email to Brad, stating what I think of this practice, in short
> Stardock Systems has lost my business on this issue.  What others do is
> purely up to them, I'm letting my wallet do the talking.
> They can call it what they want it won't be tolerated not by me any
> way.  Just as well he's in the US in Australia I would be contacting the
> dept of Fair Trading and Consumer Affairs if Stardock was an Australian
> Company.
> 
> Buyer Beware.
> 
> Subject:
>             Did you know Stardock PERIODICALLY snoopes disk, reports
> back to stardock
>             via internet (was: Re: WinBLIND TROJAN)
>         Date:
>             31 Jul 1999 10:47:27 GMT
>        From:
>             uno@40th.com (uno@40th.com)
>     Reply-To:
>             reply@only.n.news.40th.com
>  Organization:
>             Yanaguana
>   Newsgroups:
>             comp.os.os2.apps, comp.os.os2.misc, comp.os.os2.advocacy
>  Followup-To:
>             comp.os.os2.advocacy
> 
> Brad Wardell? (bwardell@stardock.com?) wrote (Fri, 23 Jul 1999
> 09:43:42):
> >Specifically, WindowBlinds sends:
> >
> >The skin you are using - so that we can determine the most popular skin
> >Your registration code - so monitor software piracy (it is OUR code
> >remember)
> >What OS you are running - websites take your OS info too
> >
> >I think that's about it.  Nothing "secret".  We primarily want to know what
> >skin you are running.
> >
> >Eventually, our skins page will use this information to determine the 25
> >most popular skins based on the skins people are running.  I think that
> >blows away any sort of "rating" system since the ultimate recommendation a
> >skin can get is by how many people are using it.
> >
> >Brad
> 
> TomG wrote:
> >
> > It is 18:27 EST and I can't reach the Stardock site to verify - apparently their site
> > is down (to update their disclaimers perhaps?).  There has NOT been anything up
> > front.  I am too sensitive to this particular issue to simply have not noticed it.  I
> > attach to their servers several times each week to download updates and I am all over
> > the WindowBlinds configuration control panel - no mention of snooping at all.  Go to
> > the "About" tab, page down between 40+ times through all the text and guess what - NO
> > mention of this feature.
> >
> > Privacy statement at the web site?  Well, I must apologize;  I do not have it
> > memorized but I will go back and analyze it.  However, claiming that this practice is
> > "No different from other products that send similar information back at the
> > acquiecence of the user" is no defense.  Moreover, I was not "asked" - before
> > download, purchase, or at the point of installing the program or any update, whether
> > or not I would like to turn this feature off.
> >
> > It just smells funny, even if this was not some *intentional* attempt at hiding the
> > snoop feature.
> >
> > Kris Kwilas wrote:
> >
> > > In article <37A33ADB.40CB0EB2@erols.com>, TomG <nospam.pendrake@erols.com> wrote:
> > > >seriously, no matter who is doing it or for what purpose.  I was not made aware
> > > >of the fact that Stardock was snooping and I DO NOT believe that it should be
> > > >my responsibility to discover it - it should be out in the open and up-front from
> > > >the vendor.
> > >
> > > WindowBlinds 0.97, the product in question (released yesterday I might add),
> > > is quite up front about it. It includes the option to disable sending the
> > > information right from the get go. No different from other products that send
> > > similar information back at the acquiecence of the user. See the privacy
> > > statement on www.windowblinds.net if you are interested in more details.
> > >
> > > No "snooping" is going on.
> > >
> > > Kris