The dispute started after a magazine published an unfavourable
review of Network Associates' firewall software in 1999. Network
Associates, the parent company of MacAfee Security and Sniffer
Technologies, accused the magazine of violating its licensing
agreement, which barred users from reviewing or testing its
products without written permission by the company.
The restriction appeared on software products and on the
company's web site, where users can download software. The New York
Attorney General's office began an investigation into the matter,
and filed a lawsuit against Network Associates in spring 2002.
The suit asserted that the clause in the licensing agreement,
imposing restrictions on what consumers said about the company's
products, violated consitutional rights of free speech, and was
therefore unenforceable. The Attorney General also claimed that the
agreement in dispute violated consumers' fair use rights.
In its decision, published last week, the New York State Supreme
court sided with the Attorney General's arguments. The court ruled
that the restrictive clause was deceptive, because it created the
impression that consumers were breaking the law by reviewing
products without consent.
The court also found that the clause restricted free speech and
was therefore unenforceable, and ordered Network Associates to
change the wording in its licensing agreements. Finally, the court
ordered Network Associates to provide sales figures so that
penalties and costs can be set.
