By Sonya Rabbitte, 5 March 2002 16:40
NEWS Network Associates, the anti-virus vendor at the centre of a court battle over its censorship of software reviews, has been slammed by industry peers for its 'draconian' measures. The software vendor found itself in court last month after the New York state attorney general's office filed a lawsuit claiming a clause contained within the software contract small print infringes on free speech. Network Associates is alleged to have used the clause to prevent a US computer magazine from publishing a review of McAfee software. In its defence, Network Associates said it was concerned that journalists would review outdated versions of the software, or conduct inaccurate benchmark tests. Graham Cluely, security analyst with rival firm Sophos, said: "There are no conditions on who reviews our software and they don't have to ask permission. They can say what they want." He said Sophos shared Network Associates concerns about testing environments but said it preferred to educate journalists on correct benchmarking methods rather then adopt 'draconian measures'. Richard Saunders, communications director with Symantec, said the company was also opposed to restricting editorial reviews. "We live by the sword and die by the sword. There will always be reviews that are not favourable, but our view is if we engage in this process we have to take the rough with the smooth. The credibility of reviews is in their impartiality," he said. Trend Micro however said it would 'strongly encourage' journalists to liaise with the company before publishing reviews. Barbara Wolfe, a spokeswoman for the company, said Trend Micro preferred to view it as a recommendation rather than an obligation. "It is in our interest to help journalists through the process. We do have language on our site that requires journalists to get our approval to do product reviews," she said.
In order to post a comment you need to be registered and logged in.
Log in or create your silicon.com account below