February 6, 2014 at 05:58Dr.Web for licensed content
The Doctor Web company on January 31, 2014 published on its website the news " Dr.Web to Help Content Owners ". Now the company is ready to block sites at the request of copyright holders, subject to the provision of documents proving that this content belongs to this copyright holder. There is a form for sending a request for blocking.
The first question that arises for me is: why does the manufacturer of the antivirus software product care so much about content that falls under the category of non-licensed?
Once, Doctor Web (unfortunately did not find this news over the past years) reported that they did not care about the pirated or licensed version of the operating system on the user's computer. For them, the main thing is anti-virus protection of the computer. And now they are on the side of copyright holders. They are easy to understand. The company has at its disposal a large user base, the presence of Parental Control in the company's products, as well as the SpIDer Gate web antivirus. And in this case, all the prerequisites to help users avoid infection of the computer with viruses that are located on sites with pirated content. Most of me will support that this is not always the case. A resource that is not entirely legal, but without viruses, can be blocked. It is not advisable to give examples of these resources.
Dr.Web February 5, 2014 published a newsletter inviting you to take a survey. Link to the news: Doctor Web is conducting a survey on access to pirated sites . The survey itself is conducted on this page: Pirate sites: you can’t block the walk? The survey is conducted from February 5 to February 15, 2014.
I propose a discussion. How do you feel about the antivirus program taking care of the licensing of the content you are viewing or downloading?
Update from pansa : These are our news writers compose texts so that at least stand at least fall = (
I repeat: it is only about issuing a warning to the user that the resource contains content that they do not have the right to distribute. There will be a button “Continue” to go to the resource. There are no restrictions, not to mention that the user will be able to disable this filter at all.
The first question that arises for me is: why does the manufacturer of the antivirus software product care so much about content that falls under the category of non-licensed?
Once, Doctor Web (unfortunately did not find this news over the past years) reported that they did not care about the pirated or licensed version of the operating system on the user's computer. For them, the main thing is anti-virus protection of the computer. And now they are on the side of copyright holders. They are easy to understand. The company has at its disposal a large user base, the presence of Parental Control in the company's products, as well as the SpIDer Gate web antivirus. And in this case, all the prerequisites to help users avoid infection of the computer with viruses that are located on sites with pirated content. Most of me will support that this is not always the case. A resource that is not entirely legal, but without viruses, can be blocked. It is not advisable to give examples of these resources.
Dr.Web February 5, 2014 published a newsletter inviting you to take a survey. Link to the news: Doctor Web is conducting a survey on access to pirated sites . The survey itself is conducted on this page: Pirate sites: you can’t block the walk? The survey is conducted from February 5 to February 15, 2014.
I propose a discussion. How do you feel about the antivirus program taking care of the licensing of the content you are viewing or downloading?
Update from pansa : These are our news writers compose texts so that at least stand at least fall = (
I repeat: it is only about issuing a warning to the user that the resource contains content that they do not have the right to distribute. There will be a button “Continue” to go to the resource. There are no restrictions, not to mention that the user will be able to disable this filter at all.
Only registered users can participate in the survey. Please come in.
Should antivirus block or warn about pirated content?
- 0.5% Antivirus software is required to block pirated content. 19
- 4.6% Anti-Virus should warn the user about pirated content on the site. 163
- 56.4% Anti-Virus should not block sites, I will decide whether pirated content or not. 1969
- 25.1% There should be a choice: block, warn or ignore pirated sites in the program settings. 878
- 13.2% I don’t care or do not use antivirus software. 462