In Significant Ruling, Information Security Industry Scores Victory in Protecting Consumers
(Woburn, MA) - August 31, 2007 - Kaspersky Lab, a leading developer of Internet threat management solutions that protect against viruses, spyware, hackers and spam, today announced the United States District Court for the Western District of Washington ruled in favor of Kaspersky Lab, granting immunity from liability in the case brought by online media company Zango.
Zango sued Kaspersky Lab to force the Company to reclassify Zango's programs as nonthreatening and to prevent Kaspersky Labs's security software from blocking Zango's potentially undesirable programs. In the important ruling for the anti-malware industry, Judge Coughenour of the Western District of Washington threw out Zango's lawsuit on the grounds that Kaspersky was immune from liability under the Communications Decency Act, part of which states: "No provider or user of an interactive computer service shall be held liable on account of any action voluntarily taken in good faith to restrict access to or availability of material that the provider or user considers to be obscene, lewd, lascivious, filthy, excessively violent, harassing, or otherwise objectionable, whether or not such material is constitutionally protected, or any action taken to enable or make available to information content providers or others the technical means to restrict access to [such] material."
The ruling protects consumer choice to determine what information and software is allowed on each computing system, and enables anti-malware vendors with the right to identify and label software programs that may be potentially unwanted and harmful to a user's computer as they see fit. Kaspersky Lab's software is designed to do just that. Users can adjust the settings to allow certain programs of their choice to come through at all times.
Steve Orenberg, President, Kaspersky Lab, USA
"Kaspersky Lab's mission is, and has always been, to make the Internet a safer place for all. We are thrilled with the outcome of this case because it supports the key message of the information security industry - consumer protection comes first."