Tech Groups Back Kaspersky in Fight Against Zango
Brian Krebs - May 5, 2008 - A broad coalition of technology groups today told a federal appeals court to toss out a lawsuit that adware maker is continuing to pursue against computer security vendor , arguing that to do otherwise would harm consumers and the future of the security software market. In May 2007, Bellvue, Wash.-based Zango -- a company that makes software to serve pop-up ads and tracks users' activities on behalf of online marketers -- sued Kaspersky, charging that the company interfered with its business by removing its "adware" without first alerting the user. In August, the judge assigned to the case dismissed Zango's suit, saying Kaspersky's actions were shielded by the federal (CDA). That law contains a "good Samaritan" clause that protects computer services companies from liability for good faith efforts to block material that users may consider objectionable (portions of the CDA have been struck down by the courts as unconstitutional, but this particular section is not one of them). Earlier this year, Zango up to the 9th Circuit Court of Appeals, saying Kaspersky's software should be labeled "" because it disabled Zango's software "without the customer's consent and without the customer's ability to override Kaspersky's invasive actions." Interestingly, Zango's appeal is being supported by the National Business Coalition on E-Commerce and Privacy, an entity formed in 2000 that counts as members some of the largest corporations in America, including Bank of America, Charles Schwab & Co., Eastman Kodak, Fidelity Investments, General Motors, JP Morgan Chase, and the Vanguard Group. Update, May 6, 11:15 a.m: Removed UPS from this list, as it is no longer a member of this coalition. Thomas M. Boyd, a partner at and counsel to the organization, said member companies are concerned that the judge's decision to toss out the suit last year could pave the way for security companies to block things like "" and "". "The district court's decision is such that under the judges interpretation of CDA, a security software company has unreviewable power to decide that any content is objectionable and to deny user access to that content without any accountability for any damages that action may cause," Boyd said. In a "friend of the court" brief filed with the appeals court today, a diverse collection of technology groups rallied behind Kaspersky in support of preserving the lower court ruling. Signatories to the brief include the , the (it's not often the BSA and EFF see eye-to-eye on tech issues), McAfee, Sunbelt Software and the (CDT). (PDF). While this isn't the first case in which an adware company has sued an anti-spyware or security vendor, Ari Schwartz, CDT's vice president and chief operating officer, said the lower court's ruling is the strongest wording yet in support of protecting security companies from these types of strong-arm lawsuits. "This is an extremely important case for consumers as to how security software protects them going forward, and whether the onus is put on the security company or [the adware vendor]," Schwartz said. "Congress clearly wanted to take the burden away from the security companies in this respect."
Continue »
