Hi Noel
Me - I'm just sitting here wondering why it's taken this long for someone to
get pissed-off enough to try this tack!
I had run out of options. I had tried everything I could think of without
using destructive tactics. I needed to get data off the machine before I
could have a proper examination of it. Thanks to a very helpful suggestion
by Don Kelloway I was able to get the data. I now have the machine on the
the butcher's block and believe me, I truly intend to find out what
happened.
My original suspicion that Norton was the cause is starting to deminish.
However, it might still be that Norton's futile attempts to protect itself
were the reason why I could not access the machine properly.
Go for it, Lancy - although if it is indeed a Criminal case, you may find
that the DPP is extraordinarily difficult to convince of anything!....
Irrelevant. The DPP would not be prosecuting the case. It might well be that
the appropriate authority would use a DPP QC but it would have nothing to do
with them.
...... and then you have to contend with the inevitable jury of '12 good
men and true' - i.e. computer dorks, who don't know how to switch
one on, let alone update an antivirus.
Ordinary people (the 12 good persons and true) have an imediate empathy with
the plight of an individual against a corporation. Indeed, it is more likely
that they would have bias in favour of the individual. This would actually
prohibit a level playing field for the corporation. The civil actions in the
USA about the tobacco industry should never have won if the law was to be
the only determining factor. The juries just new that the corporations were
wrong.
As Figgs has said, it may be more likely to secure a conviction under the
Trades Descriptions Act than whichever one you are talking about
The Trading Standards Officer would have great difficulty prosecuting this
case. One minor activity of Syantec might well breach Trading Standards
within the UK. However, I can think of no comparable European Legislation.
It would be very difficult for the UK to prosecute a company with it's
European headquarters in Dublin, Ireland.
The same would apply to any infringements under the Misuse of Computers
Act(s). European legislation in this area is not a strong as in the UK (a
personal opinion).
Let's face it Noel. I was jumping up and down like a raving lunatic in order
to get attention. It worked. Now, if I do find absolute proof that Norton is
in contravention of the Data Protection Laws (actually, I know they are, but
it's probably the same for many anti-virus companies) then what should I do?
Should I be responsible for all European users of the product to be denied
update downloads. The cure would be worse than the illness.
Clarence (Lancy) Howard
(e-mail address removed) (remove one of the 7s)
))