Email article
Last month the interwebz was jolted by Malwarebytes’ claims of IObit stealing their intellectual property and using it in IObit Security 360. Now, it seems, the fiasco has come to a happy (sort of) ending:
Some weeks ago we presented evidence demonstrating that the Chinese company IObit had stolen Malwarebytes’ database and incorporated it into their software. In the days that followed we saw a complete denial of wrongdoing by IObit. They ascribed the matches between their database and our own to anonymous sample submissions, a dubious claim which we debunked.
Nevertheless, IObit did subsequently remove all of Malwarebytes’ definitions from their database (thereby cutting their database size by ~40% in one fell swoop). Though we did not receive an apology from them, nor any official acknowledgment of their theft, this reaction speaks for itself. Removal of our intellectual property was what we wanted, and we therefore consider that we have won. We thank the community, online media outlets and our partners for their support in helping us achieve this favorable result.
…
Now if only Malwarebytes will redesign their interface to look half as attractive as IObit’s, all will be well. (Whattttt? I appreciate aesthetics!)
@Adrian: Yes I am familiar with it. As to why Malwarebytes vs SAS: For what I hear, Malwarebytes is supposed to be *better*.
@gary: As am I. While I think there is a big difference between being of Asian heritage and living in Asia, I totally agree with you. As I said earlier, two wrongs don’t make a right.
Hi Ashraf
Appreciation for your prudent stance in pulling the above wayward and somewhat inflammatory thread into line. Cudos to you for treating all viewpoints with respect, particularly those of Doru, whom it would have been too easy merely to criticise. Everyone is trying to make a valid point, however unwelcome or wrong it might be to the ears of others. (Ever thought of a career in the diplomatic corps?)
Adrian – (As the Chinese says, “It makes everybody happy by stopping your argument.”) – I like that saying. How much nicer if everyone adopted that as a maxim than “an eye for an eye and a tooth for a tooth”!
Bill
@Bill: Thanks for the kind words.
As for
>>(Ever thought of a career in the diplomatic corps?)<<
Not particularly. Thanks for the suggestion though.
@Adrian:
Hi, regarding your question on which software is best protection. Please take a look at these links:
Comparison between Malwarebytes’ Anti-Malware
and A-squared Antimalware.
http://www.brighthub.com/computing/smb-security/articles/53170.aspx
Another “source” :), why not visit IObit’s forum there they recently had a competition open for member’s. There’s a lot of new published test’s between the most of the most usual antimalware and antispyware product’s, recommend it.
Merry Christmas!
Hi Ashraf!
Thank you for this big work you’ve done for giveing us answer on our comment’s, enjoyed and appreciated it much when I returned back to read the news here!
Really fun..Thanks for lighted up my day here in Sweden! Yes, there is many different opinion’s around IObit vs Malwarebyte, it has been a very popular discussion also here in my country.
Hopefully the debat will calm down a bit now when we met the friendly time of the year and it’s Christmas:) Though it been interesting anyway in follow it, guess it more than often been some sort of trigger to ventilate other types of irritation’s and clean out the air between both fangroup’s and people’s from all over the world even if the main subject has been “theft” and perhaps together with, (which I imagine also been a big factor) more or less a wave of influences mixed with some pretending’s, expectation’s and personal believe’s.
That’s what is the most scary with all this how powerful a few written line’s can make in impact on so many more than only for the publisher or the writer who made the post. And I agree with you, I have hard to believe also that it will or would make any difference for Malwarebyte to go to court after this “mudslinging”, I’m afraid it has destroyed the proof they had against IObit.
But am no expert in United States law, right’s and sueing principle’s or Chinese. I might be wrong.
Wish you Merry Christmas and keep on the good jobb!
It’s a very impressing blog.
Cheer’s
. Many companies all over the world need your opinions on their products. They will send you a simple online survey forms, where you need to fill it out and they pay you money.
The most remarkable thing about this paid survey program is that anyone can make money with it.
It doesn’t require any special skills, training, education or previous business experience. You only need access to the Internet and basic typing skills.
It is the perfect home business for stay at home moms, students, home makers, retirees or anyone that is in need of some extra cash.
http://www.onlineuniversalwork.com
“The most remarkable thing about this paid survey program is that anyone can”
become an affiliate in hope of raking in fees from spamming blogs and forums with junk.
Interesting. Still there reamains no proof that the definitions in question were in fact stolen by IOBit. IOBit has (had) a form for submitting malware definitions that was open to anyone, not just it’s users. This form, contributes definitions to IOBit’s definition database. If a person or group of people were detecting malware with MWB, and adding those detections to IOBit’s database by use of that form, How could that be considered Theft? It’s even conceiveable that MWB could have used this method to upload the definitions in question directly to IOBit’s database. The facts are not clear. IOBit has admitted no wrong doing, and after realization of the form submittals could be used for submitions regaurdless of thier source, IOBit promptly close that avenue. They even stated this is in fact how some of these defionitions were appearing in thier database. They also promplty removed said definitions, In complete compliance with MWB’s request. There is no proof of theft here. There is a lot of speculation and assumtion.