McAfee sued for 'stifling freedom of speech'

Network Associates is standing by its McAfee division after the New York Attorney General said he was suing the company for stifling freedom of speech.

McAfee is accused of trying to gag negative press coverage of its products. Attorney General Eliot Spitzer said on Thursday that the behaviour of McAfee impinged on free speech and threatened the ability of users to criticise commercial products.

Spitzer cited the example of magazine Network World, from which Network Associates (NAI) demanded a retraction after it published a negative review.

NAI is able to do this because of a clause in the software's licensing agreement that states users have to get the company's permission before publicly reviewing or testing the product.

Despite the criticism, NAI is standing by its position. It said the clause is not designed to stifle criticism, but merely to ensure testers have the latest version of McAfee's software when they review the product.

Anti-virus software such as McAfee's works by scanning for known virus "signatures", allowing new viruses to get through the defence up to the point that an update is downloaded.

Sarah Whipp, director of EMEA marketing for NAI, said: "Network Associates stands by its licensing agreement 100 per cent. All we are trying to do is ensure people reviewing our products have the most up-to-date technology. So we ask them to get in contact with us before doing any review to enable us to send them the latest version.

"We are not trying to restrict reviews at all."

Whipp said she did not know the details of the Network World example, or why it had been asked to print a retraction. She also refused to comment on the legal action specifically, except to add: "We are happy to have a discussion with anyone about our licensing policy."

In a statement, Attorney General Eliot Spitzer said such "restrictive covenants" were illegal and harmed the public.

He added: "It would be unthinkable for an automobile manufacturer to use a contract to preclude drivers from criticising their cars, or to bar automotive magazines from pointing out product defects. By filing this lawsuit we are seeking to hold software developers to the same standard."