No, You Don't Get To Sue Facebook Because Your Account Got Hacked

from the sorry,-try-again dept

A guy in Florida has apparently sued Facebook because his account got hacked and started sending out links to a virus. He's claiming that the site failed to protect its users, and he's upset that, even though he got his account back, he lost his photos and had to re-add his friends. He's only asking for $70.50 ($0.30 for every friend he had to re-add), which got a bit of a joking response from Facebook:

"We're very interested to hear how he came up with the figure of $70.50," Facebook spokesman Barry Schnitt wrote in an e-mail to CNET News. "He's not going to get it but we promise to refund all the money he paid to use Facebook. Seriously, we're glad to know how important Facebook is to Mr. Karantsalis but his account was not disabled, is currently active, and he is using it, so I'm not sure what the problem is."

Facebook can afford to laugh since the case appears to have no legal merit. Section 230 clearly protects Facebook from liability in this situation (as it should), and the case law on similar cases backs that up. In fact, Eric Goldman notes that: "If anything, Karantsalis might be on the hook to Facebook for filing such a meritless lawsuit." The guy claims he filed the lawsuit to make a point, but the point he may end up making is that you shouldn't file frivolous lawsuits just because you don't like how things happened.

31 Comments | Leave a Comment..

Microsoft's Virus Bounty Plan Sound Familiar? It Should

from the worked-so-well-the-first-time dept

When I started seeing stories all over the web about Microsoft's offer of a $250,000 bounty for the authors of the Conficker virus, I thought that the plan sounded awfully familiar. Going through the Techdirt archives, I turned up some stories on bounties for phishers and spammers, then found a post from 2003 talking about how the company had set aside $5 million for bounties on people who wrote viruses and worms. While it's not clear if Microsoft has actually paid out any of that cash, it is pretty clear that the bounty plan hasn't done much to make Windows any more secure since it was announced. And neither will this latest bounty. Like the previous plan, it's gotten Microsoft tons of press that makes the company look tough -- but it doesn't solve the underlying security problems of the Windows platform. Catching the people who wrote the Conficker worm won't undo any of the problems they've exposed, and it certainly won't make Windows users any more secure.

Carlo Longino is an expert at the Insight Community. To get insight and analysis from Carlo Longino and other experts on challenges your company faces, click here.

17 Comments | Leave a Comment..

All Fear The Mobile Phone Botnets... That Don't Actually Exist

from the this-again? dept

For many years, we saw stories, usually pushed by security software companies, about how mobile phone viruses were some huge threat that had to be dealt with quickly before they spread around the world. Of course, that hasn't actually happened -- and there are some good reasons why it's unlikely. In fact, it seemed like such stories had been decreasing lately, perhaps in part due to some security firms scolding competitors for mobile virus FUD.

So, we were a bit surprised to see yet another story on the subject, this time suggesting that we're on the verge of (I'm not making this up) a "Cell Phone Zombie Uprising." Some researchers are predicting that mobile phones would be perfect for botnets, though, again it's not clear how that would actually happen, given the limitations of phones. While it is true that phones have become more powerful (and open) over the past few years, there still hasn't been much evidence that viruses and such are a real threat. Most phones are designed well enough to not make it easy for apps to just install themselves -- so consider us skeptical until there's real evidence of a mobile botnet rising.

11 Comments | Leave a Comment..

Pharma Patents And Why Indonesia Is Hoarding Bird Flu Samples

from the this-isn't-good-for-health dept

We've pointed to plenty of examples concerning how pharmaceutical patents actually do more to hold back life-saving cures, and here's another example. It's actually a continuation of a story we wrote about a year and a half ago, about Indonesia's decision to stop supplying bird flu samples to the World Health Organization, claiming it was worried that a big pharma would patent a drug based off of it, and Indonesia wouldn't receive any of the benefit. The country has something of a point: as pharma companies have made various cures incredibly expensive in the past.

However, Indonesia is now taking this a step further, claiming "viral sovereignty" over the bird flu. In other words, it's claiming that since the virus samples are found in the country, Indonesia owns the virus -- and it's fighting pretty much every attempt by others to do anything with the virus, sometimes using questionable claims such as one about how a US medical research facility is trying to use the virus not to create a cure, but to create biological weapons. It's basing this claim of "viral sovereignty" on the same ridiculous patent rules that allow a country to claim "ownership" and patents over indigenous plants.

While there's obviously a huge political component to this dispute, at the heart of the trouble is this idea of "ownership" of something like a plant, virus or drug -- and that's an idea that the US has been a huge supporter of, so it can hardly complain about Indonesia taking it to the logical conclusion. And, of course, that logical conclusion is the exact opposite of what supporters of pharma patents insist the system is designed to encourage. That is, thanks to this hoarding and claims of ownership, not nearly enough research is being done to try to create vaccines for bird flu. And, to make this even worse, it appears other countries are starting to consider "viral sovereignty," as well -- meaning that research into curing various diseases may grind to halt while various countries argue over who owns what.

18 Comments | Leave a Comment..

Japan Successfully Misuses Copyright Law To Convict Virus Author

from the good-outcome,-bad-reason? dept

Back in January, we noted that due to a lack of any kind of anti-virus law in Japan, officials there had twisted copyright law to charge a guy who had embedded a virus in a graphic -- where the graphic used was infringing. While it's nice to see the government go after malicious virus writers, it's troublesome to stretch a different law for that purpose. However, it appears the Japanese courts didn't agree and have now convicted the guy. It's always troubling when governments twist laws to serve a different purpose.

7 Comments | Leave a Comment..