Full story here (found via slashdot).
That is f***ing ridiculous!
"According to Tena's Web site, his research "showed how the program worked, demonstrated a few security flaws and carried out some tests with real viruses. Unlike the advertising claimed, this software didn't detect and stop ‘100 percent of viruses’."
Tena, who is currently a researcher for Harvard University in Massachusetts, said that Tegam responded in a "weird way" by first branding him a terrorist and then filing a formal complaint in Paris. During the resulting tribunal, Tena said the judge decided that because the published exploits included some re-engineered source code from Viguard’s software, he had violated French copyright laws."
This pi**ed me off so much, I decided to write to the company involved and let them know what complete jacka**es this court case is making out of them. I mean, when you make claims like 'stops 100% of viruses' be prepared to be tested and if you only get tested by security professionals -where the worst they ever do is make you red faced- count yourself lucky. Imagine what would have happened if a bank had used your crappy software and a black-hat hackers had got in because of your crappy code?
Why not drop my friends an email here and let them know what people think about this kind of greedy, arrogant behaviour?
UPDATE: searching their news site, I found this page, which would appear to be their defence of their actions. Not much of a defence though, I mean if you're going to accuse people of being one-sided and lying, then at least tell us your side (what your point is) - rather than just bitching like little girls about having your work 'deprecated'.