Network Associates, ISS trade barbs over suit
ISS (Nasdaq:ISSX) officials called the lawsuit a ploy to disrupt ISS's momentum in the fiercely competitive intrusion-detection software market, while NAI (Nasdaq:NETA) executives maintained their technology was pilfered to build a competing product, and said the suit was filed to protect shareholders.
"It's ours, we own it, and it's up to us to protect our shareholders by protecting our intellectual property," said Art Wong, director of intrusion protection at Network Associates.
A RealSecure infringement?
NAI claims ISS's flagship intrusion-detection product, RealSecure, violates NAI's U.S. patent for network intrusion-detection code and processes included in a product which it markets under the CyberCop brand name.
The patent was originally issued several years ago to a company called Haystack Laboratories, which was purchased by Trusted Information Systems Inc., itself purchased by NAI earlier this year.
Santa Clara., Calif.-based NAI is seeking monetary damages and injunctive relief, although specific financial details were not divulged.
Network Associates' patent covers technology "relating to a method and system for detecting intrusion into and misuse of a data processing system," company officials said in a statement on the lawsuit.
ISS: 'frivolous' suit
But ISS executives called the lawsuit "frivolous."
"This is a large company trying to bully its way into a marketplace" where it had been upstaged by a smaller rival, said Patrick Taylor, director of strategic marketing at ISS, in Atlanta.
ISS officials were made aware of the lawsuit after Network Associates' chief executive officer, Bill Larsen, commented on it recently during an investors' meeting, Taylor said.
And in a statement on the action, ISS CEO Tom Noonan claimed that Larsen had publicly stated that the lawsuit was intended to impact ISS's sales cycle and business momentum.
"We believe Larsen's tactics are inappropriate and reflect Network Associates' inability to compete effectively to satisfy customer needs," Noonan said in the statement.
NAI begs to differ
NAI's Wong strongly denied Larsen made any public statements on the legal action.
"That's completely untrue and it never happened," Wong said. "I don't know where they're getting that from."
ISS's Taylor said NAI gave the company no advance warning of the suit.
"In the normal course of an intellectual property dispute, you get a phone call saying, 'We think there's infringement going on, let's negotiate,' but in this case there was no such call," Taylor said.
Bitter rivalries abound
The spat certainly isn't the first bitter rivalry among security software makers.
NAI last month put an end to a long-running war of words with competitor Dr. Solomon's Group PLC by purchasing it for $640 million, closing the door on an advertising campaign that had targeted Dr. Solomon's with such nicknames as "Dr. Do Little."