Notice of intention to complain

Hi everybody

My real name is Greg Miskelly. I intend to make a complaint to the United
Kingdom Data Protection Agency regarding software products entitled Norton
as distributed by Symantec. The activity of Symantec software has prohibited
access to data on a machine that has been left with me.

I have briefly outline me complaint in

symantec.support.win95.nortonantivirus.general

but I thought it appropriate to post here also, because I do notbelieve that
anyone from Symantec would bother to read their own newsgroup..

Throughout the EU it is wholely illegal to produce and distribute software
that prohibits access to data. This legislation came about originally to
protect computer users from shareware that refused to operate after a
certain time. Nevertheless, the principle still applies. Symantec should
note that this is not a matter for litigation, (I do not have to have
millions of dollars) it is criminal law. If my complaint is found to be
valid then a criminal prosecution will result and Norton products will not
be permitted to be sold anywhere in the EU.

I will make the complaint on Monday 27th March 2006 unless I receive
immediate and unqualified assistance from Symantec in removing their
software from the stated machine.

Clarence (Lancy) Howard

X-No-Archive: yes


I can tell you that I never installed Norton without regretting it later.
But has nothing to do with your problem.

> I can tell you that I never installed Norton without regretting it later.
> But has nothing to do with your problem.

I am very pleased to inform you that I have never installed Norton since it
became a product provided by Symantec.

Clarence (Lancy) Howard

Are you a dork?



--


The best live web video on the internet http://www.seedsv.com/webdemo.htm
NEW Embedded system W/Linux. We now sell DVR cards.
See it all at http://www.seedsv.com/products.htm
Sharpvision simply the best http://www.seedsv.com



"Clarence (Lancy) Howard" <nutz777@ntlworld.com> wrote in message
news:24DUf.6456$g76.1259@newsfe2-gui.ntli.net...
> Hi everybody
>
> My real name is Greg Miskelly. I intend to make a complaint to the United
> Kingdom Data Protection Agency regarding software products entitled Norton
> as distributed by Symantec. The activity of Symantec software has
> prohibited
> access to data on a machine that has been left with me.
>
> I have briefly outline me complaint in
>
> symantec.support.win95.nortonantivirus.general
>
> but I thought it appropriate to post here also, because I do notbelieve
> that
> anyone from Symantec would bother to read their own newsgroup..
>
> Throughout the EU it is wholely illegal to produce and distribute software
> that prohibits access to data. This legislation came about originally to
> protect computer users from shareware that refused to operate after a
> certain time. Nevertheless, the principle still applies. Symantec should
> note that this is not a matter for litigation, (I do not have to have
> millions of dollars) it is criminal law. If my complaint is found to be
> valid then a criminal prosecution will result and Norton products will not
> be permitted to be sold anywhere in the EU.
>
> I will make the complaint on Monday 27th March 2006 unless I receive
> immediate and unqualified assistance from Symantec in removing their
> software from the stated machine.
>
> Clarence (Lancy) Howard
>
>

> Are you a dork?

If a dork refers to an old fart that won't be **** on by an arrogant
corporation then I am a dork. I do know how the law stands on this issue and
I will use it.

I expect you must delight in being an impudent brat.

Clarence (Lancy) Howard

On Thu, 23 Mar 2006 19:56:46 GMT, "Clarence \(Lancy\) Howard"
<nutz777@ntlworld.com> wrote:

>Throughout the EU it is wholely illegal to produce and distribute software
>that prohibits access to data. This legislation came about originally to
>protect computer users from shareware that refused to operate after a
>certain time. Nevertheless, the principle still applies.

The principle may well apply to software which *deliberately*
prohibits access to data but your case sounds like an uninstall which
has gone pear shaped. Is there any evidence that symantec are
deliberately trying to screw you?

There are any number of ways you can access the data (bartpe, knoppix
etc.) without booting to the installed winme or you can rename the
system.dat and user.dat files and do a clean install of winme (without
norton) to get at the data. I don't think complaining to the data
protection agency is the way forward.


Jim.

> >Throughout the EU it is wholely illegal to produce and distribute
software
> >that prohibits access to data. This legislation came about originally to
> >protect computer users from shareware that refused to operate after a
> >certain time. Nevertheless, the principle still applies.

> The principle may well apply to software which *deliberately*
> prohibits access to data but your case sounds like an uninstall which
> has gone pear shaped. Is there any evidence that symantec are
> deliberately trying to screw you?

Jim, I'm unaware of the *deliberate* aspect of this legislation. It's like
saying that a person who drives recklessly and causes the death of a
pedestrian is not guilty of an offence because they didn't mean to kill
anyone. Another analogy would be that a person who does not maintain his car
could cause a crash because one of the wheels fell off. This crash was not
an act of God, it would be the result of negligence.

Certainly, the aspect of intent is deeply embedded within the "Misuse of
Computers Act". That Act uses the notion of intent in a similar manner to
the Theft Act(s). I am not suggesting that Symantec have deliberately set
out to damage this womans computer. They have, though, knowingly distributed
software that performs operations that prohibit the uninstall process and
also creates a situation whereby the machine becomes unuseable.

> There are any number of ways you can access the data (bartpe, knoppix
> etc.) .......

I have now checked these out. I will attemp to use bartpe in the next few
hours. However, I do not expect any success in this endeavour. In this
article:

>
http://service1.symantec.com/SUPPOR...999193946440764

Symantec even admits to the world that it is interfering with the CMOS.

I suspect that there is a CMOS/MBR/NTFS (or CMOS/MBR/FAT) virus on board
along with Norton. I can not envisage any means whereby I can start the
machine without the boot sector of the hard disk being activated. If I can
remove the Norton I can then get at the virus. Norton Anti-Virus software is
actually protecting the virus.

> ...... without booting to the installed winme or you can rename
the
> system.dat and user.dat files and do a clean install of winme (without
> norton) to get at the data. I don't think complaining to the data
> protection agency is the way forward.

All I want from Symantec is one of them to email me and give me instructions
how to remove their product from a floppy disk boot. It is their code that
is preventing me from getting at the data on the machine. As nobody from
Symantec gives a damn then what should I do? Oh well, scrap the lady's
photographs of her newborn and put it down to experience. No, I won't do it.
I intend to become an absolute pain in the ass to Symantec.

Y'know, Symantec can not claim that some unknown virus is the cause of the
problem. They are the one's that are charging people so that they can
protect their data. It's like saying that a police officer can't do his job
properly because there are criminals in the area.

I'll update you on bartpe when I have tried it. From reading the web pages,
I don't think that knoppix is a correct way forward.

Clarence (Lancy) Howard
nutz7777@ntlworld.com (remove one of the 7s)

On Fri, 24 Mar 2006 11:00:04 GMT, "Clarence \(Lancy\) Howard"
<nutz7777@ntlworld.com> wrote:

>
>Certainly, the aspect of intent is deeply embedded within the "Misuse of
>Computers Act". That Act uses the notion of intent in a similar manner to
>the Theft Act(s). I am not suggesting that Symantec have deliberately set
>out to damage this womans computer. They have, though, knowingly distributed
>software that performs operations that prohibit the uninstall process and
>also creates a situation whereby the machine becomes unuseable.

If you find a bug which crashes the system it's no doubt covered
somewhere in the eula that they're not responsible for the
consequences.

I would have thought that any system security/integrity software is
likely to restrict itself being closed down otherwise it wouldn't be
fit for its purpose. Though for sure some programs are so hard to
close down that even the machine administrator has difficulty never
mind a virus.


>
>> There are any number of ways you can access the data (bartpe, knoppix
>> etc.) .......
>
>I have now checked these out. I will attemp to use bartpe in the next few
>hours. However, I do not expect any success in this endeavour.

If you have a usb flash drive, insert it prior to booting from bartpe
and simply copy the data you want onto it.

>
>I suspect that there is a CMOS/MBR/NTFS (or CMOS/MBR/FAT) virus on board
>along with Norton. I can not envisage any means whereby I can start the
>machine without the boot sector of the hard disk being activated. If I can
>remove the Norton I can then get at the virus. Norton Anti-Virus software is
>actually protecting the virus.

Boot sector viruses on the hard disk won't be activated if you don't
boot from the hard disk.

>
>All I want from Symantec is one of them to email me and give me instructions
>how to remove their product from a floppy disk boot. It is their code that
>is preventing me from getting at the data on the machine. As nobody from
>Symantec gives a damn then what should I do? Oh well, scrap the lady's
>photographs of her newborn and put it down to experience. No, I won't do it.
>I intend to become an absolute pain in the ass to Symantec.
>

Unless it's a known issue, which it doesn't appear to be if you can't
find anything on their website, I don't see how they can help. Your
machine won't boot to windows now and their software won't run without
windows.

>Y'know, Symantec can not claim that some unknown virus is the cause of the
>problem. They are the one's that are charging people so that they can
>protect their data. It's like saying that a police officer can't do his job
>properly because there are criminals in the area.
>
>I'll update you on bartpe when I have tried it. From reading the web pages,
>I don't think that knoppix is a correct way forward.


If you don't have a flash drive, knoppix may well be more suitable
that bartpe. You can access a FAT or FAT32 filesystem on the hard disk
from knoppix and iirc it already has cd burning software on there to
create the cd you were trying to create earlier.


Jim.

On that special day, Clarence (Lancy) Howard, (nutz7777@ntlworld.com)
said...

> I am not suggesting that Symantec have deliberately set
> out to damage this womans computer. They have, though, knowingly distributed
> software that performs operations that prohibit the uninstall process and
> also creates a situation whereby the machine becomes unuseable.

Well, they are not the only ones, that managed to botch their client's
machines, as
http://isc.sans.org/diary.php?storyid=1184
demonstrates. I am afraid, the EULA with the ever-present "it's not our
fault if something goes haywire" will block your attempts at suing
them, as you (or the lady) bought the software, clicked an "I agree"
button while installing the software, and so they are set.


Gabriele Neukam

Gabriele.Spamfighter.Neukam@t-online.de


--
Ah, Information. A property, too valuable these days, to give it away,
just so, at no cost.

On Fri, 24 Mar 2006 17:23:16 +0100, Gabriele Neukam
<Gabriele.Spamfighter.Neukam@t-online.de> wrote:

>Well, they are not the only ones, that managed to botch their client's
>machines, as
>http://isc.sans.org/diary.php?storyid=1184
>demonstrates. I am afraid, the EULA with the ever-present "it's not our
>fault if something goes haywire" will block your attempts at suing
>them, as you (or the lady) bought the software, clicked an "I agree"
>button while installing the software, and so they are set.
>
>
He's not planning on suing (civil law) them but is claiming that the
data protection act (criminal law) has been contravened because
symantec software is preventing the machine from booting..to an extent
that the cmos can't be edited or erased.

I didn't know any software could do that.


Jim.