Days after being bought by Microsoft, Skype starts installing crapware on Windows systems

[Ohio Joe]

http://www.zdnet.com/blog/hardware/days-after-being-bought-by-microsoft-skype-starts-installing-crapware-on-windows-systems-without-consent/13015

I'm shocked.... or not.

[WannaJumpMyScooter]

1. of course

removing skype now... I wondered how shit was getting in... forgot I had it installed

[ixion]

2. well, yeah... it's Microsuck and

it's what they do best.

[originalpckelly]

3. This is why there needs to be a sticker program for each software license.

Basically, they are almost certainly legally allowed to do this under their license. Under the terms of the user agreement, they may even be able to modify the license even if the user doesn't have a chance to see it.

What I suggest is a program like THX to ensure the quality of a license. A bunch of lawyers could get together and pick apart a license and rate it, based upon how fucked up it is, and if it gives the power of the do shit like this, they could warn against it.

Each new license for computer software would be required to be submitted to this group of lawyers for a rating, or the group warn against using the product for failure to comply with the rating process.

The rating lawyers or their assistants could give a simple and understandable version of the licenses major provisions, so that average people could read it.

[Ohio Joe]

4. That is a really good idea

Holy crap... That definitely needs to be done.

[Occulus]

5. It's shit like that which long ago made me conclude that the EULA is not, cannot be, binding

I usually completely ignore the EULAs these days and concentrate on just using the Software as I want to, terms of the EULA be damned.

I find it ridiculous that I can buy a piece of software, must open it to access the EULA (which is often not in print, but on the disc itself), disagree with that EULA, and NOT be entitled to getting m money back. Were the law sane, the EULA would be printed in the packaging and be accessible without having to actually open the box the disc is in, which of course you can't return once opened.

I've tried to read EULAs all the way through, and of course it's written in legalese so opaque that only a lawyer can fully understand the terms. That ought to be flatly illegal, too.

[Jim Lane]

7. Too labor-intensive. Here's a simpler variation.

You want a panel of lawyers to review each new software license? That would keep quite a few lawyers busy full-time, year-round. Who's paying their salaries?

Alternative: A one-time panel of software and privacy experts prepares a generic license. All new or updated software is conclusively presumed to be using the generic license unless and to the extent that the vendor/purveyor lists the differences between its license and the generic one. If a company "inadvertently overlooks" a particular difference, there's no problem -- no difference was disclosed so the generic license applies.

There might need to be two generic licenses, one for free software and one that involves payment of a fee.

Of course, this couldn't be implemented without legislation to impose it.

[Heywood J]

16. Or you could just go with something like the GPL (or its variants). (NT)

[TroglodyteScholar]

17. +1

[onehandle]

6. How is that new or different from the normal Windows experience? nt

[ikri]

8. Just one minor correction

Microsoft have only agreed to buy Skype, the takeover hasn't actually happened yet & MS have zero input into how Skype operate their business until the takeover is concluded.

I detest companies who try this shit. Whoever owns or runs Skype need to learn that MY PC is not their playground to do with as they want, but Microsoft aren't to blame for this fiasco.

[Celebration]

9. Bad headline

The deal has not been finalized, and this had nothing to do with Microsoft. They don't have control of the company yet.

Blame Skype.

[tblue37]

10. Uh-oh. I was going to download skype this summer to use--but

now I won't.

I have been postponing doing it because I was just too darned busy, but now I am glad I never got around to it!

It really pisses me off that companeis do this.

[digitaln3rd]

11. Judging by some of the links in that thread,

It's not a new occurrence.

Apparently it's been a part of Skype since 2006, according to the company.
http://www.easybitsmedia.com/NewsAndMedia#2011-04

I'm no fan of Microsoft but it's a bit premature to blame it on them.

[bemildred]

12. Let's face it, Windows is more of a marketing tool than an operating system. nt

[canetoad]

13. Skype is not the only

Pre-configured voip softphone - it's just the best known and most idiot-proof.

I've just installed this one: http://www.mondotalk.com
It's less glitzy and gives you a number rather than a Skype-type name but seems to be working fine. It would be good to see other softphones that DUers are using.

[dickthegrouch]

14. Thank god I didn't use skype this weekend

I'd have gone ballistic over such a violation.

I read EULAs meticulously especially the bits where they (don't) tell me what they are going to use my personal information for.
I am extremely disappointed in US congress for not making all person information the property of the individual it pertains to decades ago. I realize the advertisers will have been lobbying against that for decades, but it was the right thing to do. They can still resurrect the situation by making it mandatory to delete someones info if they request it (every month and again after any restores from backup :mad: )

[Stinky The Clown]

15. Mac . . . . iChat . . . . part of the OS . . . . conncts to any "chat" identity, such as AIM

Stable, reliable, no bloat.

[DainBramaged]

18. Jumping to conclusions, an art here.....

While the deal with Microsoft is a way off from being finalized, and Microsoft management will be in no way responsible for this goof-up

Sure, blame Microsoft, a soft target everybody loves to blame for everything from burnt eggs to watching you sleep.