RSSSymantec Sues Hotbar Over Adware
By David Worthington | Published June 8, 2005, 1:36 PM
In what could become a pivotal courtroom battle against malware, Symantec has filed suit against Hotbar.com, asserting its right to detect and remove components of the software that it considers to be adware. Under the suit, Symantec is not seeking any damages; rather, it is asking the court for a declaratory judgment classifying certain Hotbar program files as adware that should be treated as a security risk.
"By asking the court for clarification on this issue in our favor, we hope to continue alerting our customers about the presence of these program files, protecting them against possible security risks," said Joy Cartun, senior director of legal affairs for Symantec. The case will be heard in the U.S. District Court for the Northern District of California, San Jose Division. A representative from Hotbar.com could not be reached by press time.
Wow my post disappeared completely...no more lawyer jokes for me...
Score: 0
|Ditto. If I can't personally punch those idiots in the head I hope somebody sues them into nonexistence!
Score: 0
|Amen to that!
Score: 0
|GO GET 'EM SYMANTEC!!! Even though I just switched to NOD32 (www.nod32.com), I'm still a fan ;-)
Score: 0
|I think its great the spammers are getting sued, but i dont see why symantec needs permision to clasify a file as malware. Symantec should be allowed to clasify any title as they please. It's up to the user to act on it.
Anyways, if you dont like how symantec handles certain program, you are free to use anyone elses suite.
--etaham
Score: 0
|If Symantec wins, they would be given permission to classify "certain program files" of other adware programs as security risks and precedent would be set to allow others to follow suit.
Take for instance your IM clients, if you use Yahoo, MSN Messenger, AIM or even ICQ, you have adware, adware being advertised based freeware essentially.
So, then does that give Symantec license to treat such programs as security risks? Maybe so and maybe not, depending on the wording of the judgement.
By saying, yes, you can classify certain portions as adware when in fact the program itself is listed as adware though you give license to adware remover programs to cut the advertising portion of the freeware out which will in effect, cut the revenues supporting the software which made it free in the first place.
Imagine AIM if you had to pay for it because of that... it is a possibility pending the outcome and events that take place after precedent is set.
Score: 0
|Um...I understand your point...but we both know that is taking it to the far right...not necessarily the extreme. Symantec is one of the more 'ethical' companies. Unlike M$ who likes to throw adware (Claria...for example) into all of their OS's.
Score: 0
|You are exactly right. It is very interesting to see how this will turn out.
Imaging downloading software/freeware that has adware bundled in it. By making software developers distinguish between the two types and the ability to remove one without the other will ultimately affect the price in which we will have to pay. However, I think it is a good move and will ulitmately cause software developers to choose a more appropriate adware company to bundle with.
I am not sure what the legal issue is here with regard to why Symantec cannot just remove it based on what the consumer decides. I have used their products and when it comes to adware, most of its scans will find the actual ad program, but will not delete it. Why? They tell you what it is and where it is stored and all you have to do is select delete - and its gone. Why can't they do this?
In addition, it is one thing to allow comet cursor on your computer, but what ultimately happens is that this one program(hotbar) will bring in several other components and begin to take over(restrict bandwidth) and corrupt files on the computer. That is what should be illegal.
Score: 0
|I have been installing MS for several years and have never seen this "adware" you are referring to. Can you elaborate?
From an upgrade to a full install, and running virus/adremoving/spyremoving programs right after, I do not see any instance of adware on the computer. I very well may be overlooking something as I am not a programmer and do not see things at that level - if you are. But would like to know what you are referring to.
Thanks
ps - If you are buying a computer from a 3rd party, then yes, there will be adware installed, but not by the OS.
Score: 0
|Claria = Gator, they changed their name. Also I don't think it is part of the default windows install :)
Score: 0
|Sue them bankrupt!!! Good move Symantec.
Score: 0
|It is not a lawsuit of money, but of legal language.
Not sure if you got that.
Score: 0
|hurray for symantec ! if there ever was a close definition of rubbish, hotbar is the personification. anyway, they do keep computer maintenance busy cleaning up and reinstalling all the time. good riddance !
Score: 0
|Excuse my ignorance, but what's the problem? Is it illegal for Symantec to classify these files as adware and remove it without a declaratory judgement from the court?
Score: 0
|Possibly. Defamation of software? j/k!
Score: 0
|The problem is hotbar prevents symantec from removing it. A DoS in a sense.
Score: 0
|Thank you Symantec!
Score: 0
|I hope Hotbar gets their a$$es sued off.
Score: 0
|