Anti-Spyware Law Snags Anti-Spyware Vendor
Country Lawyer writes "Washington state's anti-spyware law has just resulted in a $1 million victory for the state, the first successful prosecution under the new law. The weird thing? They sued an anti-spyware vendor." From the article: "Washington State went after the company after 1,145 state residents purchased the software and the complaints began rolling in. Secure Computer president Paul Burke will now pay $200,000 in penalties, make $75,000 worth of restitution to Washington residents, and pay another $725,000 to cover the state's attorneys' fees. The irony of an anti-spyware law being used against an anti-spyware vendor was not commented upon."
Absolutely. Lawyers have no right to be paid for their work.
When's the last time we paid sharks for eating swimmers?
Same principle applies.
It would be ironic if they were more than nominally an anti-spyware company. I read the article, and it sounds like the ruling was correct.
More music, fewer hits
Yeah, they're really red faced after this court loss
- had deceptive popups, offering a free scan, that always, in every machine, report that the user had spyware. Well, by the time you downloaded and ran the scan, you certainly did have spyware. So I guess it was telling the truth.
Actually, the difference is the lawyers bill you for the suit, the soap and water to clean it, and the time.
... 459 days per year the hours add up pretty quickly.
Give a man a fish and you have fed him for today. Teach a man to fish, and he'll say "WHERE'S MY FISH, YOU IDIOT?"
Avoid Missing Ball for High Score
I know, where's BadAnalogyGuy when you need him?
This is like a bullet proof vest maker shooting someone in the chest. No, wait, this is like a vest maker being shot in the chest, with his own gun, and then being thrown in a river. No wait...
What if the Hokey Pokey really is what it's all about?
Hmmm .. it appears that the offer is no longer available. It seems to have had a limit.
Just not the limit that the company intended ;-)