Slashdot Mirror
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."
FTFA: "The dubious marketing tactics did not end there. Secure Computer also sold its product using pop-up ads which warned users that their computers might be infected with spyware, and it offered them a free system scan. The results of the scan were invariably positive. "Our investigation found that this so-called free scan always detected spyware, even on a clean computer," said Senior Counsel Paula Selis, who led the state investigation. "In order to remove this falsely detected spyware, users were instructed to pay $49.95 for the full version of Spyware Cleaner." It is illegal under Washington law to "induce a computer user to download software by falsely claiming the software is necessary for security purposes," she added."
I was kind of tired of seeing stuff like they used....
Support NYCountryLawyer RIAA vs People
These guys used bullshit popups in web browsers to convince people they needed to buy an Anti-Spyware product. Go get'em Washington.
There is a war going on for your mind.
They spammed and pop-up advertised with no opt-out.
They made false claims as to a limited time offer.
They provided free scans that resulted in a false-positives.
They offered upgrades to a "pro" version of a product that was essentially the same as already purchased.
Say what you want about over-regulation, but these guys seemed a perfect target for these type laws. Has nothing to do with their supposed status as anti-spyware vendor.
Note, this is not an anti-spyware vendor who have got used. It is an so called "rouge anti-spyware" vendor. Rouge anti-spyware software is often distributed along with spyware. The rouge antispyware then tells you to buy it to get rid of spyware. It also popups on websites and misleads you into buying their software.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Rogue_software
$750000. Damn, they some blood sucking lawyers!
The irony of going after a spyware vendor ends once you discover that they're spamming lying scum:
"...their "Spyware Cleaner" product had, well, a couple of flaws: it didn't work well, it deleted a user's Hosts file after installation, and it tried to convince users to "upgrade" to another program that did essentially the same thing.
But it was the way that Spyware Cleaner was marketed that attracted the Attorney General's attention in the first place. The company allegedly spammed users to advertise its product, included deceptive subject lines, failed to include an opt-out mechanism, and suggested that the product was "discounted" for a "limited time," when in reality it was always available for the same price.
The dubious marketing tactics did not end there. Secure Computer also sold its product using pop-up ads which warned users that their computers might be infected with spyware, and it offered them a free system scan. The results of the scan were invariably positive. "Our investigation found that this so-called free scan always detected spyware, even on a clean computer," said Senior Counsel Paula Selis, who led the state investigation. "In order to remove this falsely detected spyware, users were instructed to pay $49.95 for the full version of Spyware Cleaner." It is illegal under Washington law to "induce a computer user to download software by falsely claiming the software is necessary for security purposes," she added.
Returned Peace Corps IT Volunteer
7 lawyers making $100/hour working about 6 months (40 hours workweeks, no overtime) would account for it.
Not to mention their legal staff. Evidence aquisition. Etc. Should they have sought a larger penalty? Sure. But don't underpay the lawyers just because the penalty is low.
"people who bought and used the thing have to split $75,000."
Over about 1000 people, that averages out to $75 for what they paid $50 for.
The taxpayers have (directly or through their representatives) chosen to have certain wrongdoers pay them (the taxpayers) back for those salaries and other expenses in certain cases when the expenses are devoted to dealing with those wrongdoers' wrongdoing; essentially, this money will go to the state's general fund, to offset expenses (both personnel expenses that would have been made anyway but devoted to other purposes, and additional expenses, personnel and otherwise, that are directly attributable to the case.)
As explained, its not double dipping, and its not at the taxpayers' expense. Also, $725,000 in legal expenses to deal with 1,145 claims isn't all that much (the fact that its much bigger than the claims themselves is one reason why laws like this create a state right of action rather than forcing victims to sue on their own in the first place.)
It was NOT a ruling, it was a settlement. HUGE difference. The most important is that no "precedence" has been set. What that basically means is that this case cannot be used in the future to help in the prosecution of other offenders.
Is it a beginning? Yes. Does it move us closer to being able to prosecute others? No.
While I applaude the state of Washington on bringing charges in the first place, I think that they did the people of the state a disservice by settling. It seemed they had a pretty solid case yet caved at the last moment.
I suspect that what happened is that someone decided that in order to collect ANY funds from the company, they had to settle. Otherwise, the defendants attorneys would have "used" up all the funds in an effort to defend the company leaving none for the "fines".
Attorneys have been known to obfuscate, delay and appeal cases all in the name of extending their own value, and thus, their fees.
This post just pointed out the the complete uselessness of the scoring system used on slashdot.
According to the post, it was scored 4 for being informative when it is comprised of nothing more then a cut/paste from the article, prefaced with a remark that attempts to point out the obvious. Don't get me wrong. I'm not slamming the poster here, but rather the scoring system.
Kudos, Slashdot, on an excellent scoring system.
(By the time some of you read this, it may have changed, dunno. But I can almost assure you that THIS post will be slammed as a Troll. Woot!)
Assume a billable rate of $150 per hour, which is more than the average general practice firm charges, but far less than the $300+ that big city specialist firms charge for their most experienced people. At the $150 rate, it takes only 4834 billable hours to to get to $725K, and that is excluding expenses (expert witnesses, courier services, etc.).
With 2000 work hours per year, that is less than three attnys full time for a year. With a case that complicated, and testing a new law (so they REALLY want to get it right to set the good prescedent), this doesn't seem unreasonable.
Of course, I'm sure he doesn't get a discount, or get to nit-pick the bill either.
Yeah, that's not where the money is likely to go and no one ever sees a decrease in their tax rate just because some large fines and penalties are to be collected. I have yet to see a letter in the mail saying "good news! you don't have to pay as much tax this year because we sued a bunch of jerks!"
I have learned a lot about taxes and the public's misconception of them... especially where federal taxes are concerned. For every expense that the government makes, there's supposed to be a tax that takes care of it. Gasoline tax pays for one thing, cigarette taxes pays another thing. Your voluntary personal income tax pays the interest on the federal debt to the Federal Reserve corporation... that sort of thing. As to the state level taxes? I guess it'll vary by state, but the statement about lowering taxes is completely bogus.
Zonk. Stop posting shit.
Seriously what is this crap? "Washington Law Stops Anti-Spyware Vendor"? The vendor in question was FALSE MARKETING claiming machines were INFECTED when they were clean. It was throwing pop-ups in peoples' faces and everything. The SEC could shut these guys down, seriously. You might as well say "Built-In FTP Password Sniffer in Linux Kernel" and talk about the Linux Kernel sniffing FTP passwords and sending them offsite; there's actually an example code out there to explain what a rootkit is and demonstrate connection tracking, it's not part of vanilla Linux or any distro, and this would make great FUD. It'd be right along Zonk's line of posting too.
My suggestion is that Slashdot needs to throw Zonk out because his stories are all bullshit.
Support my political activism on Patreon.