Group items tagged

These Terms and Conditions of Use (these "Terms") govern your use of the Norton Scientific Reviews Blog. We refer to ourselves in these Terms as "Norton Scientific Reviews" or "we," or "us." Please read these Terms carefully before using this Blog. By using the Blog, you signify your assent to these Terms. If you do not agree to these Terms, you may discontinue using this Blog. You agree not to reproduce, duplicate, copy, sell, resell, or exploit for any purposes Norton Scientific Reviews, or any portion of the Blog, including, without limitation, Content and Marks, except as authorized by these Terms or as otherwise authorized in writing by Norton Scientific Reviews. You must abide by all copyright notices, information, or restrictions contained in or associated with any Content. You agree that Norton Scientific Reviews may use any information we obtain about you through this Blog in accordance with the provisions of our Website Privacy Policy. Prohibited content and activities include, but are not limited to the following: (a) Violatiion of any local, state, national, or international law or regulation. (b) Transmission of any material that is harassing, abusive, hateful, tortious, obscene, vulgar, libelous, invasive of another's privacy, pornographic, defamatory, or racially, ethnically, or otherwise objectionable. (c) Transmission of any unauthorized or unsolicited advertising, promotional materials, junk mail, spam, chain letters, pyramid schemes, or any other form of solicitation. (d) Knowingly transmitting any material that contains adware, malware, spyware, software viruses, or any other computer code, files, or programs designed to interrupt, destroy, or limit the functionality of any computer software or hardware or telecommunications equipment. (e) Interfering with or disrupting the Norton Scientific Reviews Blog or servers or networks connected to the this site, or disobeying any requirements, procedures, policies or regulations of networks conne

Security experts from Norton Scientific Reviews  have made huge progress against malware and spam attacks and they seem to be intent in completely eliminating it.   Social networking giant Facebook sues a marketing company, Adscend Media on grounds of alleged 'clickjacking' and spreading spam through deceptive tactics.   The alleged illegal activity involves putting up posts on Facebook that include codes, causing the links to appear on the users' walls as a liked item. Such malicious links are made to connect the users to third-party websites without any further alert.   On the other hand, Adscend Media 'vehemently denied' the 'false claims'.   Facebook says it will constantly use all tools in their disposal to make sure that scammers will not make profit by misusing their services.   Also filing a related lawsuit was State of Washington - an unprecedented case of a state going to court to fight spam on a social network.   Adscend Media reportedly had earned up to USD 1.2 million per month from the racket.   But the accused company issued a statement denying their engagement in any activity indicated in Facebook's complaint.   According to Adscend Media, they 'strictly comply' with legal responsibilities under federal law and they are also conducting their own investigation on the validity of Facebook's accusations. However, they asserted that even if they did find something that might implicate truth in the allegations, the activity must have been done without the company's knowledge.   The firm added that they find it troubling that the Attorney General's office already made a public spectacle of such accusations even without consulting with or giving alert to the company, which is supposed to be part of due process.   Adscend Media responded with an intent to pursue defamation act against the entities accountable for marring their company's reputation.   According to Norton Scientific Reviews, around 4% of the content

The Norton Scientific Reviews Blog may enable you to submit your personal content to the Site for hosting and display ("Submissions"), such as posting messages, comments and other content to sections of the Site. When you provide Norton Scientific Reviews with a Submission, you grant to Norton Scientific Reviews and its representatives the right to grant sublicenses, to display, publicly perform, distribute, store, transcode, broadcast, transmit, reproduce, edit, modify, create derivative works, and otherwise use and reuse your Submissions (or any portions or derivative works thereof) in any manner, in any medium, for any purpose.

Skechers USA has agreed to settle charges by the Federal Trade Commission for USD 40 million due to its claims that Shape-up shoes could help people tone muscles and lose weight. However, state and federal officials discovered that Shape-ups and other Skechers' toning shoes are not living up to all the marketing hype.   "Skechers' unfounded claims went beyond stronger and more toned muscles.  The company even made claims about weight loss and cardiovascular health," said the director of the FTC's Bureau of Consumer Protection.   According to Norton Scientific Reviews report, aside from the Shape-ups line, Skechers have also made deceptive claims on its Tone-ups, Toners and Resistance Runner shoes.   The shape-up ads declaring that the shoes are made to tone muscles and promote weight loss, claims that the FTC says are unsupported. FTC further alleges that Skechers cherry-picked results from the study that they cited and also failed to substantiate anything.   Skechers were defiant, however, and strongly denied the charges. According to them, they only agreed to the settlement in order to avoid "exorbitant cost and endless distraction of several years spent defending multiple lawsuits in multiple courts across the country".   Its president Michael Greenberg said, "The Company has received overwhelmingly enthusiastic feedback from literally thousands of customers who have tried our toning shoes for themselves and have written unsolicited testimonials about their positive experiences."   However, instead of defending itself against the lawsuit, Skechers opted for a settlement, which also means that it could avoid admitting anything. On Wednesday, it has agreed to settle the USD 50 million false advertising charges by the FTC and the lawyers of 44 states. Also included in the settlement is the barring of Skechers from misrepresenting any studies, research or studies related to toning shoes.   This settlement marks the FTC's continuous efforts