Slashdot Mirror


Flight-Sim Maker Threatens Legal Action Over Reddit Posts Discussing DRM (arstechnica.com)

An anonymous reader quotes a report from Ars Technica: Today's controversy begins with a Reddit thread that noted FlightSimLabs' A320 add-on installing "cmdhost.exe" files in the "system32" and "SysWOW64" folders inside the Windows directory. The strange filename and location -- which seems designed to closely match those of actual Windows system files -- made some Reddit users suspicious, especially given FlightSimLabs history of undisclosed installations. FlightSimLabs responded on Facebook last Thursday by saying that the files came from third-party e-commerce service eSellerate and were designed to "reduce the number of product activation issues people were having." This system has been acknowledged in the FlightSimLabs forums in the past, and it apparently passes all major antivirus checks.

The "controversy" over these files might well have died down after that response. But then FlightSimLabs' Simon Kelsey sent a message to the moderators of the flightsim subreddit, gently reminding them of "Reddit's obligation as a publisher... to ensure that any libelous content is taken down as soon as you become aware of it." While ostensibly welcoming "robust fair comment and opinion," the message also warns that "ANY suggestion that our current or future products pose any threat to users is absolutely false and libelous." That warning extends to the company's previous password-extractor controversy, with Kelsey writing, "ANY suggestion that any user's data was compromised during the events of February is entirely false and therefore libelous." "I would hate for lawyers to have to get involved in this, and I trust that you will take appropriate steps to ensure that no such libel is posted," Kelsey concludes. A follow-up message from Kelsey reiterated the same points and noted that FlightSimLabs has reported specific comments and demanded they be removed as libelous.

31 of 175 comments (clear)

  1. Inform that ass about the "Streisand effect" by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 5, Insightful

    Somebody send that pompous jackass this link:

    https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Streisand_effect

    1. Re:Inform that ass about the "Streisand effect" by Applehu+Akbar · · Score: 3, Interesting

      This isn't the UK. So long as you don't make anything up, you're bulletproof against libel.

    2. Re:Inform that ass about the "Streisand effect" by mark-t · · Score: 2

      Bulletproof against libel perhaps... but truth is not always a defense against defamation. There have been rare precedents where a person was found to be telling the truth, but still lost a defamation case.

      That said, truth remains the most consistently reliable defense to such a suit, but one should be aware that extenuating circumstances may exist where that defense will not be sufficient. In particular, if the comments are found to have been made with deliberate malice and intent to cause harm, truth of their statements will not necessarily be sufficient to stave a lawsuit.

      Google the phrase when is truth not a defense to defamation, and you can probably find at least one example of USA precedent in the match or two.

    3. Re:Inform that ass about the "Streisand effect" by jwhyche · · Score: 2

      Doesn't things like this give you warm fuzzes all over? Makes you just want to run right out and buy their product. Oh wait, maybe not.

      --
      I read at +2. If your post doesn't reach that level I will not see or respond to it.
  2. Trojan Horse is Trojan Horse by forkfail · · Score: 5, Funny

    Even if these are executables are benign now, they have names that might cause folks to ignore them and their activities. So, we start off with names for their "security" binaries that those who are more cautions about such things might describe as being already at least somewhat deceitful.

    And who knows what additional functionality might be added in an update?

    Of course, I am sure that no software publisher would ever do anything malign like I might have unintentionally implied. I am sure that FlightSimLabs is a completely honorable company with nothing but the best interests and well being of their customers in heart and mind. So, this is all just a ridiculous hypothetical.

    --
    Check your premises.
  3. I know that DCMA and Safe Harbor laws allowed copyright holders (and trademark holders) to get content taken down. But I thought that libel was something that forum sites were protected against. Otherwise, why is Musk/Trump/Hillary not getting every anti-Tesla/pro-Muller/anti-PrivateEmailServer story taken down from /.?

    --
    Your ad here. Ask me how!
    1. Re:Wait by fahrbot-bot · · Score: 5, Insightful

      But I thought that libel was something that forum sites were protected against.

      FlightSimLabs said, "I would hate for lawyers to have to get involved in this," because they would probably lose a libel fight against Reddit. They would hate that.

      --
      It must have been something you assimilated. . . .
    2. Re:Wait by dissy · · Score: 4, Informative

      But I thought that libel was something that forum sites were protected against.

      No, actual legally defined libel has no specific protections.
      The site when served legal papers requesting it, is supposed to pass on the information they have about the poster. Failing to do that can very well make the legal buck stop on the sites shoulders.

      But that isn't really the issue here.

      The questions are if the comments even qualify to potentially be libel, and if and only if so, did a court deem them so.

      Options by definition can never be libel or slander.
      Claims to facts are the only things that potentially can be libel or slander.

      This alone makes the companies claim dubious, when they word it as "ANY suggestion that our current or future products pose any threat to users is absolutely false and libelous"

      Posting "I think they would do _" can never be libel, as it is an opinion that can't be proven.
      Posting "They have done _" however is a fact, and if found to be a false-fact may qualify as libel.

      Both libel and slander are forms of tort law (libel being a written tort and slander being a spoken tort)
      https://dictionary.law.com/Default.aspx?selected=1153

      Specifically:
      " It is a tort (civil wrong) making the person or entity open to a lawsuit for damages by the person who can prove the statement about him/her was a lie."
      "Publication need only be to one person, but it must be a statement which claims to be fact and is not clearly identified as an opinion."

      and to your question about websites or forums being protected:
      "Most states provide for a party defamed by a periodical to demand a published retraction. If the correction is made, then there is no right to file a lawsuit. "

    3. Re:Wait by SuricouRaven · · Score: 2

      They don't have to win. They just have to make losing expensive enough for the other side that Reddit's owners would rather just delete any posts which might invite legel action.

    4. Re:Wait by ooshna · · Score: 2

      I have a feeling Reddit can outlast them.

    5. Re:Wait by Curunir_wolf · · Score: 2

      I have a feeling Reddit can outlast them.

      HA! Right. Because Reddit has such a clear history of defending their users and their right to post content....

      --
      "Somebody has to do something. It's just incredibly pathetic it has to be us."
      --- Jerry Garcia
  4. Barbara Streisand... by kaatochacha · · Score: 4, Funny

    Is that you?

  5. So, they have a time machine? by fahrbot-bot · · Score: 3, Insightful

    ... the message also warns that "ANY suggestion that our current or future products pose any threat to users is absolutely false and libelous."

    I wasn't aware that FlightSimLabs could see into the future.

    --
    It must have been something you assimilated. . . .
  6. Demonstrably false by K.+S.+Kyosuke · · Score: 4, Interesting

    ANY suggestion that any user's data was compromised during the events of February is entirely false and therefore libelous

    Screenshots were produced by an employee of the company depicting the compromised accounts of an individual. Not only makes this the claim not a libel but someone at the company is apparently guilty of CFAA violation.

    --
    Ezekiel 23:20
  7. Translation by Jfetjunky · · Score: 4, Insightful

    "I would hate for lawyers to have to get involved in this"
    Translation: "I'm pretty sure I don't have a case here, so let me try intimidation first".

    1. Re:Translation by F.Ultra · · Score: 4, Funny

      Myself I would just tell Westboro Baptist Church that FlightSimLab is a GayLesbian simulator and watch the fallout.

  8. And over here we have Barbara Streisand house by BLToday · · Score: 3, Informative

    I haven’t been keeping up with flight sims for years but if I come back I’ll keep them on my don’t buy list.

  9. Re:Simon Kelsey is a moron by jedidiah · · Score: 2

    > You do not make legal threats on the Internet. It should be rule 71. Or 86.

    You don't make threats against free speech unless you have something to hide.

    --
    A Pirate and a Puritan look the same on a balance sheet.
  10. file name looks like an virus if any thing they ne by Joe_Dragon · · Score: 3

    file name looks like an virus if any thing they need to make so the #1 link of google is says that it's safe and it's part of the app. And also give easy to read detail on why it's named that and not say FlightSimLabsdrm.exe

  11. Comment removed by account_deleted · · Score: 2

    Comment removed based on user account deletion

  12. I kind of feel sorry for them by DreamMaster · · Score: 3, Insightful

    I kind of feel sorry for them. I've worked as an IT professional for small companies for my entire career so far, so I can understand the frustration that could come from rampant piracy, particularly for such a nice market company that probably doesn't have much in it's bottom line to begin with. Whilst it doesn't entirely excuse any bullying tactics they did against Reddit.. given some of the vitriol (and I'd even go so far as to say "rabid" for some comments I've seen) is so excessive that I could understand how upset it could make them.

    Keeping in mind that even in the "furore" from back in February, whilst they did distribute malware in one of their packs, my recollection is that it was explicitly designed to only activate for a single specific user that had been rampantly pirating and distributing their software. I can understand how frustrated that piracy could make them, particularly if they were unable to identify the culprit any other way. Let's face it.. law enforcement agencies like the FBI (or their country's equivalent) likely wouldn't make piracy done against small companies a major priority. I'm not saying that it wasn't ill advised, but it seems like all too many people are using the instances to jump on a "let's insult them / they're the bad guys" bandwagon.

    1. Re:I kind of feel sorry for them by HiThere · · Score: 4, Insightful

      So you're saying you remember the company committed interstate felony, but we should forgive them, because we weren't the target?

      I don't really follow your reasoning. And if your statements are true I don't understand why the company isn't in federal court as a defendant.

      --

      I think we've pushed this "anyone can grow up to be president" thing too far.
  13. Lets make some "libel" by Pinky's+Brain · · Score: 4

    FlightSimLabs (FSLabs) admitted to distributing remote hacking tools, intending to use them illegally. Any company who requires normal application software to be installed with admin rights is run by morons and anyone who actually installs such outside a VM is likewise. Especially after the company by their own admission proved themselves to be a criminal organization as well as criminally incompetent.

    1. Re:Lets make some "libel" by tlhIngan · · Score: 2

      Any company who requires normal application software to be installed with admin rights is run by morons

      No, it's perfectly reasonable to require installation to require admin rights. I mean, you can't install Linux applications without admin rights eitehr.

      It's required to put files in user-protected locations, like /bin or c:\Program Files\ so users don't go accidentally mucking up installations.

      If a user can install stuff to system wide locations without admin, they can easily replace said system wide stuff as well, an that's generally a bad thing. After all, you don't want users replacing /bin/ls or /bin/sh on you without admin, do you?

  14. Re:Libelous?? by bobbied · · Score: 4, Insightful

    Ah, yes.. Triggered are we?

    I think a lot of people need a crash course on what the 1st amendment (or any right recognized by the constitution) means and doesn't mean and what legal "rights" they protect and from whom..

    The US Constitution is pretty clear that it is designed to describe how government works (specifically the federal government) and the bill of rights is designed to tell the government what it may NOT do, what rights the government may not limit.

    The important thing to realize is the 1st Amendment only says the government may not infringe your right to speak what you like, publish what you choose or practice your religion. So if Reddit wishes to take your posts down, they may, as they are not the government. Now if Reddit was government owned or the government was ordering Reddit to remove or censor posts, THEN there would be an issue.

    --
    "File to fit, pound to insert, paint to match" - Aircraft Maintenance 101
  15. Shitty Company does shitty things by nitehawk214 · · Score: 5, Interesting

    This is the company that installs password loggers on their customer's computers. Why anyone would still do business with them is beyond me.

    --
    I'm a good cook. I'm a fantastic eater. - Steven Brust
  16. "passes all major antivirus checks" by Sloppy · · Score: 5, Interesting

    it apparently passes all major antivirus checks

    Ah, the proprietary software world's version of a security audit.

    It obfuscates itself like malware, smells like malware, but the suspected attacker says it's not malware. Therefore: it's safe and doesn't work against the user's interests!

    --
    As copyright owner of this comment, I authorize everyone to defeat any technological measure which limits access to it.
  17. info@flightsimlabs.com by thechemic · · Score: 2

    Don't forget to tell them how you feel.

    --
    Let's make like a bird... and get the flock outta here.
  18. Interesting by nehumanuscrede · · Score: 2

    Why would they name their files to so closely match official Windows files KNOWING the first thoughts anyone will have will be along the lines of trojan, malware, virus ?

    Why not name the damn things to reflect the program that installed them ?

  19. Re: From the headline by sabri · · Score: 2

    Various tools exist to allow you to create read only versions of your system.

    Various OSes already implement that by default. Have a look at FreeBSD's runlevels.

    --
    I'm not a complete idiot... Some parts are missing.
  20. Link by sneurlax · · Score: 2

    If anyone else is interested in the password-extraction incident alluded to in the summary, here's a writeup: https://medium.com/@lukegorman... Outstanding!