The dispute started after a magazine published an unfavourable review of Network Associates' firewall software in 1999. Network Associates, the parent company of MacAfee Security and Sniffer Technologies, accused the magazine of violating its licensing agreement, which barred users from reviewing or testing its products without written permission by the company.
The restriction appeared on software products and on the company's web site, where users can download software. The New York Attorney General's office began an investigation into the matter, and filed a lawsuit against Network Associates in spring 2002.
The suit asserted that the clause in the licensing agreement, imposing restrictions on what consumers said about the company's products, violated consitutional rights of free speech, and was therefore unenforceable. The Attorney General also claimed that the agreement in dispute violated consumers' fair use rights.
In its decision, published last week, the New York State Supreme court sided with the Attorney General's arguments. The court ruled that the restrictive clause was deceptive, because it created the impression that consumers were breaking the law by reviewing products without consent.
The court also found that the clause restricted free speech and was therefore unenforceable, and ordered Network Associates to change the wording in its licensing agreements. Finally, the court ordered Network Associates to provide sales figures so that penalties and costs can be set.