inteller
Sociopaths always win.
join:2003-12-08
Tulsa, OK | wringing hands with glee...
...excellent... |
|
nohotbar
@res.r | Oh Yea.
Big money looks out for the little guy.
Hope Symantec has big enough ones to stick it out. |
|
TKJunkMail
Enjoy the sun
Premium
join:2002-03-03
Avalon, NJ
 ·Sprint Mobile Broa..
 ·Comcast
4 edits |  Symantec taking cowards way out
Symantec should have just stuck to their guns and continued to remove Hotbar as an adware product and waited to be sued if Hotbar had the guts to sue them. Instead they go to court and ASK the government to back them. In effect, passing the decision on to the court as to whether Hotbar is adware or not. Symantec knows Hotbar is adware. They just want to avoid being the one to make the decision.
Symantec is not seeking damages as part of the suit. Symantec is petitioning for a declaratory judgment by the court affirming Symantec's assertion that certain Hotbar program files are indeed adware and can be treated as computer security risks.
"By asking the court for clarification on this issue in our favor, we hope to continue alerting our customers about the presence of these program files, protecting them against possible security risks," said Joy Cartun, senior director of legal affairs for Symantec. "Through this effort, we're trying to ensure that our customers have more control over the programs that run on their computers."
This is nothing but a PR move on Symantecs part. If they win the case they look like good guys. And if they lose, which is very possible, they can tell their customers it isn't their fault but the courts.
My Web Page
My Blog
Join Red Room Forum |
|
cork1958
Cork
join:2000-02-26
Fruitport, MI
3 edits | Exactamundo!!(?)
Haven't been a fan of Symantec/Norton for a long time, but GIVE 'EM HELL Symantec!! Hotbar has been one of the longest running, nastiest spywares around. |
|
garagerock
Premium
join:2002-06-14
Louisville, KY
| reply to TKJunkMail
By that logic, then no one should ever do anything about spyware except to continue removing it? What happens when spyware finally outruns the products that remove them?
It isn't like this is a brand new issue that went to court days after it appeared. This has been going on for some time, and maybe it is time to address this legally, once and for all. |
|
inteller
Sociopaths always win.
join:2003-12-08
Tulsa, OK | too bad this isn't a communist country.
The government could just outlaw spyware and like that it would be gone (or the people that continued making it would be) |
|
Karl Bode
News Guy
join:2000-03-02
Host:
Road Runner
PC gaming GAMES
PC gaming Tech
| reply to TKJunkMail
Re: Symantec taking cowards way out
100% incorrect.
quote:
They just want to avoid being the one to make the decision.
No, they want to avoid an endless stream of court cases against fly-by night scumware operators.
The goal here is to set legal precedent for future cases showing detection and removal of these programs is legal. This aids Symantec's fight against all other adware vendors. In fact if they win, it aids all spyware removal companies.
It should bring some absolutes to a very muddy argument. |
|
JSRoman
Premium
join:2005-03-10
Callahan, FL | reply to inteller
Re: too bad this isn't a communist country.
Actually if this was a communist country the last thing I would be worried about would be spyware/adware. Food would be a much higher priority.Good chance you wouldn't have a computer to get spyware. |
|
kaila
join:2000-10-11
Lincolnshire, IL
clubs:  | reply to TKJunkMail
Re: Symantec taking cowards way out
PR move or not, a court decision will put to rest every other anti-spyware companies fears of legal intimidation by Hotbar. |
|
HotRodFoto
Premium
join:2003-04-19
Denver, CO | reply to JSRoman
Re: too bad this isn't a communist country.
unless yer Red China lol |
|
TKJunkMail
Enjoy the sun
Premium
join:2002-03-03
Avalon, NJ
·Sprint Mobile Broa..
·Comcast
| reply to Karl Bode
Re: Symantec taking cowards way out
said by Karl Bode  :100% incorrect. The goal here is to set legal precedent for future cases showing detection and removal of these programs is legal. This aids Symantec's fight against all other adware vendors. In fact if they win, it aids all spyware removal companies. It should bring some absolutes to a very muddy argument. And if they lose? Which is a 50-50 proposition. What does that do for the cause?
In any case, win or lose, IMO this case will have no lasting result on this battle at all. The adware delivering companies will just move out of the court's jurisdiction.
If this problem is ever to be resolved, the law needs to be changed making the companies advertising thru these adware software companies responsible. And I doubt the politicians will ever take this step.
P.S. LOL - 100% incorrect Karl?? I see you haven't lost your penchant for hyperbole.
--
My Web Page
My Blog
Join Red Room Forum |
|
Karl Bode
News Guy
join:2000-03-02
Host:
Road Runner
PC gaming GAMES
PC gaming Tech
| It's not hyperbole. Your post was completely wrong. It's a great pre-emptive strike on Symantec's part, and one they should win.
quote:
In any case, win or lose, IMO this case will have no lasting result on this battle at all.
Apparently Spyware researchers Eric Howes and Ben Edelman, who spend the majority of their waking hours studying this subject, don't agree:
Don't believe me? Ask them:
»Symantec Files Suit Against Hotbar in Adware Case |
|
Defcon888
Premium
join:2003-07-22
San Bruno, CA
 ·AT&T Yahoo
·DSL EXTREME
| Adware and Spyware
The only way to not get infected is to make sure the users don't install unknown junk and keep their systems updated. Computer users should learn computer security before they are even allowed on a comp... bleh
--
defcon888@gmail.com
proud user of sbc services
|
|
JPCass
join:2001-01-23
Denver, CO
| reply to TKJunkMail
Re: Symantec taking cowards way out???
No, this seems to me like a sound move that should benefit everyone, based on the old principle that the best defense is a good offense.
Symantec has the deepest pockets, and presumably the best lawyers, so they are best suited to take on the ad-/spy-ware companies in court - and win. Assuming they win, it sets a precedent, and it will be much harder for those companies' lawyers to go around threatening anyone, particularly the smaller players in the business. |
|
hayemh
@69.157.x.x | Good Job
It's about time Symantec did something to hotbar.I have seen it and it's very frustrating and time consuming to remove this program. |
|
wriley
I'M Sick Of Fixing Your Computer.
Premium
join:2001-08-30
Edmonton, AB
clubs: | symantec should make desisions like a big boy.
Counterspy and many other companys could deside on there own to remove it. Why is Symantec passing the buck onto the courts? |
|
wriley
I'M Sick Of Fixing Your Computer.
Premium
join:2001-08-30
Edmonton, AB
clubs:
| reply to TKJunkMail
Re: Symantec taking cowards way out
maybe the ruling will help consumers, but if the ruling goes the other way it will severly hurt. And will set a presedent for future cases against spyware removal companies. They should have just done it like counterspy and the other good removal companies. |
|
kamm
join:2001-02-14
Brooklyn, NY
·T-Mobile US
1 edit | reply to TKJunkMail
said by TKJunkMail :said by Karl Bode :100% incorrect. The goal here is to set legal precedent for future cases showing detection and removal of these programs is legal. This aids Symantec's fight against all other adware vendors. In fact if they win, it aids all spyware removal companies. It should bring some absolutes to a very muddy argument. And if they lose? Which is a 50-50 proposition. What does that do for the cause? In any case, win or lose, IMO this case will have no lasting result on this battle at all. The adware delivering companies will just move out of the court's jurisdiction. If this problem is ever to be resolved, the law needs to be changed making the companies advertising thru these adware software companies responsible. And I doubt the politicians will ever take this step. P.S. LOL - 100% incorrect Karl?? I see you haven't lost your penchant for hyperbole. You're completely missing the point, pal.
Ever heard about precedent cases? This is one of them.
PS: I, for one, certainly welcome this and if Symantec winbs this case - which I expect -, I'll buy two subscriptions from them immediately (desktop+laptop), in return for their great action. |
|
kamm
join:2001-02-14
Brooklyn, NY
·T-Mobile US
2 edits | reply to JSRoman
Re: too bad this isn't a communist country.
said by JSRoman :Actually if this was a communist country the last thing I would be worried about would be spyware/adware. Food would be a much higher priority.Good chance you wouldn't have a computer to get spyware. The last thing I was worrying about is food during my first few decades in my native, then-communist country.
Typically food never been a problem in any EE communist country, except few extreme dictatorships like Ceaucescu's Romania or Enver Hodja's Albania, Kim Ir Sen's North Korea etc. Other than that the last communist-related hunger was the Big Ukraine Famine under Stalin, about 70-80 ys ago.
We had always hearty, good quality food for dirt cheap, it was one of the principles of a "socialist" system.
Also when did you get your first computer?
I got my first Sinclair Spectrum 48k in 1983, one year after its debute - in a then-full-blown "socialist" country. |
|
guitarzan
Premium
join:2004-05-04
Skytop, PA
·epix
| reply to JSRoman
said by JSRoman :Actually if this was a communist country the last thing I would be worried about would be spyware/adware. Food would be a much higher priority.Good chance you wouldn't have a computer to get spyware. Actually this is Not a communist country.Which you try to take this off topic with that remark.Actually people who live/lived under the rule of communism.Know more about spy shit than most people here.Again you try to steer this thread off topic with
"Food would be a much higher priority".How is this related to Symantec.?
"Good chance you wouldn't have a computer to get spyware".Sure if you're a pygmy tribe living deep in the jungle some place.Do you work for a spyware company.?
Now if Symantec and other AV companies WILL take these
scuzz bags to court. |
|
