Slashdot Mirror

← Back to Stories (view on slashdot.org)

Safe Harbor Spells Win For Kaspersky In Malware Case Against Zango

Posted by ScuttleMonkey on from the hire-good-engineers-instead-of-lawyers dept.

suraj.sun writes to tell us that the 9th Circuit Court of Appeals has ruled in favor of security company Kaspersky in the recent case questioning their classification of Zango software as malware. "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 the precedent-setting ruling for the anti-malware industry, the Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit 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 . Part of the Communications Decency Act of 1996 states: 'No provider or user of an interactive computer service shall be held liable on account of ... any action taken to enable or make available to information content providers or others the technical means to restrict access to [objectionable] material.'"

11 of 93 comments (clear)

  1. Didn't know what Zango was by sakdoctor · · Score: 5, Informative

    So I looked it up:

    Zango, formerly ePIPO, 180solutions and Hotbar

    Oh look, they've had four different names, because they have to keep running away from how scummy they are.
    KILL IT WITH FIRE!

    1. Re:Didn't know what Zango was by DaMattster · · Score: 5, Interesting

      Both 180solutions and Hotbar were the bane of my existence back in the day. Both these malware items would just keep coming back like persistent, antibiotic resistant strains of bacteria. You think you've got every last little registry entry and file removed and lo and behold it would be back. This wouldn't be malware if the company provided honest instructions for the removal of these programs. In some cases, I had heard, the removal instructions simply added code to reinforce the malware. However, because they are being deceptive about its install and automatic re-install, it makes the behaviour unethical. Therefore Zango and its ilk should take the slap on the ass and go sulk in a corner somewhere.

    2. Re:Didn't know what Zango was by fataugie · · Score: 4, Funny

      I say we blast off and nuke the site from space...it's the only way to be sure.

      --

      WTF? Over?

    3. Re:Didn't know what Zango was by NecroPuppy · · Score: 5, Funny

      Only half my problem was the uninstall of these items.

      The other half was the users (bless their hearts) who would reinstall them. It took threatening to fire the next person who installed HotBar before they stopped.

      --
      I like you, Stuart. You're not like everyone else, here, at Slashdot.
  2. What's more disturbing by Brian+Gordon · · Score: 5, Insightful

    We actually need a court precedent for deciding if adding a feature to your program is legal?

    1. Re:What's more disturbing by blueg3 · · Score: 4, Insightful

      Courts deciding whether we can add features to programs is nonsense.

      Of course, I might be biased. I just added an undocumented feature to our popular medical records management software that allows doctors to access patients' medical records over the Internet. Encryption and access restrictions work just fine, I think, provided the software is configured properly...

    2. Re:What's more disturbing by Crazy+Wolverine · · Score: 5, Insightful

      I think even more alarming is the fact that Zango didn't get laughed out of the courtroom, and that this case made it all the way to the 9th circuit court of appeals. Back when they were 180Solutions, they were one of the most notorious adware companies around.

      --
      Hail to the victors baby!
  3. Re:As long... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 4, Interesting

    For once, a market solution works.

    Kind of reminds me of when AVG started to play by different rules. The users were vocal and loud; AVG got the picture and fixed their problems.

    It's a shame that we need courts to affirm common sense.

  4. Serves them right. by LikwidCirkel · · Score: 4, Informative

    I certainly remember 180-Solutions for being the last straw for me ever using MSIE. Several times they got me with their creative drive-by-installs back in the day, and those were just about the only malware infections I've had in my life. They're an absolute scumbag company and I'm glad about the outcome of this.

  5. Re:What's next? by FrostDust · · Score: 4, Insightful

    Even the most virulent of scumbags deserve their day in court.

  6. ISPs can now block ads by Animats · · Score: 4, Interesting

    This expands the "safe harbor" of the CDA to cover ad-blockers. Now, ISP's can offer ad removal as a service. Corporate firewalls can provide ad-blocking. This would cut web traffic way down and speed up browsing.