Enigma appealed again, and the Ninth Circuit last week revived the case, except for Enigma's claim of tortious interference with contractual relations.
#WINDOWS SECURITY VS MALWAREBYTES SOFTWARE#
When a company in the computer security business describes a competitor’s software as 'malicious' and a 'threat' to a customer’s computer, that is more a statement of objective fact than a non-actionable opinionĪt the time, Malwarebytes' outside counsel, Moez Kaba of Hueston Hennigan, celebrated the judgment by noting the district court’s ruling "validates the right of cybersecurity firms to identify potentially unwanted programs and recognizes the rights of users to choose whether or not to enable those programs on their devices."īut Malwarebytes' victory lap was premature. So far, Malwarebytes has been generally winning, and Enigma losing. In 2021, the California district court, having been told by the Ninth Circuit to reconsider Enigma's lawsuit, again dismissed the complaint. Malwarebytes, supported by advocacy groups and other security outfits, asked the Supreme Court to review the case but was denied in 2020.
That appellate ruling meant that Malwarebytes may be liable for characterizing Enigma's software as PUPs if it's deemed to be a competitor – a decision that has the potential to discourage security companies from characterizing software as harmful. But Enigma appealed and the Ninth Circuit in 2019 reversed the district court's decision, creating in the process an anticompetitive animus exception to Section 230 of the Communications Decency Act that generally shields online service providers.
0 kommentar(er)
