Zango has been trying to force Kaspersky ( A well known antivirus client ) to allow the Zango software to be installed on computers running the Kaspersky software. As of now Kaspersky auto blocks the installation of Zango and Kaspersky clasiffies Zango as malisious software program. After the lower courts moved in Kaspersky’s favor the ruleing moved to the 9th U.S. Circuit of Appeals. The court ruled that Kaspersky Lab, which classified online media company Zango’s software as malware and “protected” users from it accordingly, could not be held liable for any actions it took to manufacture and distribute the technical means to restrict Zango software’s access to others, as Kaspersky Lab deemed it “objectionable material.” For all of us out there this is great news. Well all but the people of Zango and other such programs.
Antivirus makers should have the right to protect their customers as they see fit and block aplications that they feel are not 100% up to par. While Zango does clealy have a User Agreement that states what will go on, many customers are unaware because they do not read the fine print. Kapersky and many other such antivirus clients are simply taking the iniciative on this. Most Security products will still allow you to install such software but you have to create a rule to allow the sofware to be installed. Personally I 100% agree with the courts on this and feel the out come could not of been better.
Kaspersky Lab, a leading developer of secure content management systems, informs that the 9th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals has ruled in Kaspersky Lab’s favor in claims brought by Zango. In a precedent-setting case for the Internet security industry, the 9th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals ruled last week that Kaspersky Lab is entitled to immunity under the safe harbor provision of the Communications Decency Act from a suit claiming that its software interfered with the use of downloadable programs by customers of Zango. The court ruled that Kaspersky Lab, which classified online media company Zango’s software as malware and “protected” users from it accordingly, could not be held liable for any actions it took to manufacture and distribute the technical means to restrict Zango software’s access to others, as Kaspersky Lab deemed it “objectionable material.” Zango sued Kaspersky Lab to force the company to reclassify Zango’s programs as nonthreatening and to prevent Kaspersky Lab’s security software from blocking Zango’s potentially undesirable programs. In a landmark ruling for the anti-malware industry, the 9th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals affirmed a lower court ruling that Kaspersky Lab is a provider of an “interactive computer service” as defined in the Communications Decency Act of 1996.
The court decision stated: “Kaspersky contends that Zango’s software is adware, and possibly spyware. Spyware, which is often installed on a computer without the user’s knowledge or consent, covertly monitors the user’s activities and exposes the user to the risk that his or her passwords and confidential information may be stole. As its software qualifies, Kaspersky is entitled to Good Samaritan immunity.” The ruling protects a consumer’s choice to determine what information and software is allowed on their computing systems, and protects the ability of anti-malware vendors to identify and label software programs that may be potentially unwanted and harmful to computer users. Kaspersky Lab’s software is designed to do just that. Users can adjust the settings to allow certain programs of their choice to come through at all times.
Other resources:
http://cdn.ca9.uscourts.gov/datastore/opinions/2009/06/25/07-35800.pdf
Speak Your Mind