Who has the right to judge malware
morning tide of anti-malware software enters a tournant.Avec the end of Yahoo China in the competition “Qihoo malicious prosecution” that militate in favor of strange tiger lost on the anti-malware software, the Internet industry has become a watershed, after a year of noise, the industry is homing: enautorité recognized notes that the lack of standards for time, which effectively closed the malware found
Odd tiger in the first instance verdict, said the company does not agree, Beijing High Court shall sit on the eve of the second trial, “malware management seminar for the global” Beijing.Lors this meeting, including industry veteran lawyers, publishers of anti-malware, antivirus and experts, including those related to the Internet, will be triggered by malicious software, malware further increase attributed the lack of qualifications.
A person admitted as the Internet, whether it is anti-malware Union, or company Qihoo without authorization or government agencies to make the industry in general to convince an impartial third party to determine, the Internet industry will eventually fall into a war without end mots.Non only the development of the Internet industry is very negative, will affect the development of anti-malware software.
Tiger lost on the bizarre, the point of view of the Internet highly prominent lawyers Gang Hu: “In fact, the content of this dispute is the basic definition of who qualifies, killing malware. The definition of civil society and companies there is a risk of software malveillantsPendant this time both moral hazard, but also mixed with business interests, this Regulation should be transferred to government agencies or any third party. “
At the same time experts have also said that the case of the first instance judgment is also due to the absence of law biaisées.No 1 Beijing Intermediate People’s Court Vice President Liu Yong intellectual property to the court for “malicious software” related to the trial of the case does not exist in the so-called “moral missing, this Act and the legal principle that can résoudreces questions.Les results first instance decision to maintain a competitive fair between business principle.
Proceedings of anti-malware software, the participants of the Beijing University of Posts communication describes Legal Network Research Center, said, “must be considered in two ways, the authority of the first companies to be found dead The second criterion for identifying malicious rationalization. “while the odd tiger and another authority has not yet been identified by commercial companies with their own criteria for identifying software from another company is a” malware ” cause damage to the reputation of certain companies, of course, the legal risk.
Internet industry needs a healthy environment, the regulated firm, therefore, the definition of malware, and the authority was unable to determine the body seems ready to escape, only a breakthrough in this respect, a healthy and orderly competition from the Internet to emerge.