Zango, and adward maker, lost in its lawsuit against Kaspersky (an antivirus/antispyware and antimalware company). Zango claimed that Kaspersky was unfairly deleting Zango’s ads on its customer’s websites.

The courts ruled in favor of Kaspersky against this kind of adware and spyware because: “A provider of access tools that filter, screen, allow, or disallow content that the provider or user considers obscene, lewd, lascivious, filthy, excessively violent, harassing, or otherwise objectionable is protected from liability,” said the 9th Circuit.

This is a precedent-setting case because both Zango and Kaspersky have legitimate claims: Zango says its customers are fully aware of the deal they struck with them which allows them to deliver content and browsing-targeted advertisements (that’s questionable if the customers are “fully” aware). And Kaspersky claims it’s simply providing a service that their customers want by deleting unwanted adware and spyware.

This asks the greater question: don’t we personal computer users have a right to do whatever we want with our PCs? If we want adware and spyware (not sure who really wants this), don’t we have the right?

And conversely, don’t we have the right to have antispyware software delete and remove such adware and spyware if we chose? Since when did the courts need to get involved.

This will most certainly continue to be a major issue in the antispyware world. Especially since serving ads via adware and spyware is so incredibly profitable.

For more on the fight against antispyware, you can visit the Anti-Spyware Coalition website.