Amicus Brief of Cybersecurity Law Professors in Enigma Software v. Malwarebytes

19 Pages Posted: 20 Nov 2019

See all articles by Eric Goldman

Eric Goldman

Santa Clara University - School of Law

Date Written: November 7, 2019


In Enigma Software v. Malwarebytes, the Ninth Circuit ruled that 47 U.S.C. 230(c)(2)(B) does not protect anti-threat classification decisions that are allegedly based on "anti-competitive animus." This amicus brief, joined by 7 professors, explains how the Ninth Circuit's ruling makes the Internet less safe. Many anti-threat software programs are, in fact, rogue software that should be classified as threats. Those classification decisions will create greater legal risk, and that will discourage legitimate anti-threat vendors from labeling rogue software as threats. To ensure that anti-threat software vendors can continue to vigorously protect consumers from rogue software, the amicus brief urges the Ninth Circuit to rehear the case.

Keywords: malware, spyware, viruses, spam, adware, rogue software, scareware, crapware, bloatware, 47 usc 230, section 230, cda, threats, amicus brief, cybersecurity, ransomware, competition, antitrust,

JEL Classification: D18, D82, K21, K42, L4

Suggested Citation

Goldman, Eric, Amicus Brief of Cybersecurity Law Professors in Enigma Software v. Malwarebytes (November 7, 2019). Santa Clara Univ. Legal Studies Research Paper, Available at SSRN: or

Eric Goldman (Contact Author)

Santa Clara University - School of Law ( email )

500 El Camino Real
Santa Clara, CA 95053
United States
408-554-4369 (Phone)


Do you have a job opening that you would like to promote on SSRN?

Paper statistics

Abstract Views
PlumX Metrics