That result is squarely at odds with this Court’s decisions in Fair Hous. Second, by uncritically accepting what appears from the opinion to be Appellant’s bare allegations of anticompetitive animus, the panel’s decision threatens to make it all too easy for plaintiffs to plead around Section 230(c)(2)(B). As explained in Appellee’s rehearing petition, that defies fundamental rules of statutory interpretation and collapses an important distinction between subsection (c)(2)(A), which includes an express “good faith” requirement, and subsection (c)(2)(B), which conspicuously omits one. First, the panel improperly imported a motive-based good-faith limitation into Section 230(c)(2)(B). Three aspects of the majority’s decision especially concern IA and its members.
#SPYHUNTER MALWARE REMOVER VS MALWAREBYTES SOFTWARE#
These legal threats will hinder the ability of anti-threat software vendors to properly classify threats to businesses and consumers, which will make the Internet less safe for everyone. The panel decision will foster spurious legal accusations of anti-competitive blocking of software programs that are, in fact, dangerous to businesses and consumers. Though anti-competitive animus could be a troubling reason for one software program to block another, the Court’s decision overcorrects for this concern. The panel or the Court en banc should rehear this case so that it can reevaluate the ruling’s consequences for cybersecurity. Venkat and I drafted this brief (with the help of Jess Miers) and filed it on behalf of 7 other professors. Its petition for rehearing.įour amicus briefs were filed in support of Malwarebytes’ brief:Ĭybersecurity Law professors’ amicus brief Perhaps not surprisingly, the defendant Malwarebytes has requested en banc or panel review. It was a 2-1 ruling on a key topic, so it’s the kind of case that could support further proceedings in the Ninth Circuit. Malwarebytes, the Ninth Circuit issued a troubling Section 230(c)(2)(B) ruling that allowed plaintiffs’ allegations of anti-competitive animus to override the safe harbor for anti-threat software vendors.
0 kommentar(er)
