MySecurityCenter threatens with lawsuit – April 2011

The English speaking part of the internet lack information about the shady sides of the antivirus company My Security Center. As the company is increasingly trying to spread outside of Denmark, we have decided to translate this blog into English. Comments and questions are welcome at our contact page.
– PrivacyDefence February 2013

(To avoid confusion, keep in mind that the following blog was originally located at the address before we chose to continue the project)

On Monday the 28th March 2011 Privatliv.Webs was contacted by Janus Rægaard Nielsen from My Security Center. Janus demanded to have the blog MySecurityCenter versus ytringsfriheden (MySecurityCenter versus freedom of speech) edited or completely removed. It was claimed that the blog was violating the Media Liability law, and presumably as evidence of this the email had attached a document from a court case between My Security Center and Spywarefri which took place on the 24th November 2010. The approach from Janus was set for a fair and reasonable dialog, and to let all parties have a say in the matter, so that the version of the story from Spywarefri should not go unchallenged.

Privatliv.Webs finds it only fair that all involved parties should get a chance to explain why MySecurityCenter continues to censor bad publicity of their products from the Internet. We have therefore given Janus and My Security Center an outstretched hand and called for a dialog which could then be published in our blog. This way My Security Center would get the opportunity to express their views and explain how things really are. But this offer is unfortunately rejected by Janus, who maintains that a deletion or editing of the blog is required prior to any further dialog. We have chosen to respect this decision and therefore cannot show you the messages from Janus.

Privatliv.Webs have not deleted or edited our blog.
That is due to the following:

  • It is a key issue for Privatliv.Webs to seek freedom of speech and counteract censorship on the Internet.
  • We do not know which parts of the blog that would be violating the Media Liability Law. This is something Janus has not told us, and further dialog on the issue is as mentioned rejected. We also do not know which specific part of the law our blog, according to Janus, should be violating. Under these circumstances it is obviously a bit difficult for us to readjust our blog.
  • Last but not least: The document from the court case between MySecurityCenter and Spywarefri which was attached to the email from Janus, leaves much to be desired in regard to documentation. Admittedly, Janus chose to name the document “MYSecurityCenter vinder fogedretssag mod Spywarefri” (MYSecurityCenter wins lawsuit against Spywarefri), but in the scanned PDF document it appears that there are actually no winner in the court case. The court case ended with a settlement.
    In other words, there is no actual decision from a judge, and there is no evidence that the blog on this site should be violating any law. No judge has ruled any judgment. So it sounds a bit shallow when Janus repeatedly refers to the decision of the court.

It’s a shame Janus declined the offer to enter into the open dialog that he himself first seemed to offer, because as can be seen there are several issues which it would be interesting to get clarified.

Others are also being threatened had an online discussion that they were threatened to remove. Read more here:
Slettet tråd: “MYSecurityCenter V Spyware” (Deleted thread: “MYSecurityCenter V Spyware”) (this online discussion has reportedly led to further threats from Janus). has been threatened by Janus because of this online debate, but has at the time of writing chosen to ignore the threats: MySecurityCenter – klager over dårlig omtale! (MySecurityCenter – complaints about bad publicity!)

What’s worse is that MySecurityCenter also has approached and Here they managed to get most of the bad reviews of their products removed. It’s sad, both because MySecurityCenter now get a better score on the page than they should, and also because it demonstrates that the otherwise good concept behind Trustpilot has failed.

New bad test result for MySecurityCenter, which is a well known company that tests and compares antivirus programs, has just published their most recent tests. MySecurityCenter have not produced their own anti-virus, but have bought the rights to use the technology in “CA Internet Security Suite”. This antivirus belongs to the few in the test that failed, and thus could not be certified. In fact, it came on an absolute lowest position out of the 23 tested programs. So the test seems to confirm the results of the test that Spywarefri was threatened to remove from their website. See the new test here:
You may wonder if Janus and My Security Center will also contact AV-Test to get their test results removed from the Internet.


Update 7th April 2011:
The night between the 5th and 6th April, Janus Rægaard Nielsen apparently read the above blog. This has resulted in no less than 6 new threatening emails. He has now contacted his lawyer to start a lawsuit.

Update 23th April 2011
We have just been made ​​aware that it may seem at odds with the law to link to the original program review of My Security Center. It is not possible for us to explain how this can be consistent with the idea of freedom of speech, let alone in the public interest in this case. But of course we are not interested in being on the edge of the law in any way, and have therefore chosen to remove all links to the original program review, even though it had already been removed from the internet and thus still could not be read by following our links. It is very possible these links were entirely legitimate, but we are not lawyers, and we prefer to be on the safe side. It might also help reduce the number of threatening emails that we continue to receive from Janus Rægaard Nielsen, which he will not let us publish on our website.

We are aware it is not illegal to link to a page that links to a page that may be at odds with the law (if so this link would be illegal: We therefore have no plans to remove our links to articles such as the ones on where the comments link to the review of My Security Center. In addition, we can hardly be held responsible for what internet searches our readers do. We believe that people should be able to see and decide for themselves.

Dansk antivirus-firma lukker munden på kritikere (Danish anti-virus firm silence critics)
“Vi truer os ikke til gode anmeldelser” (“We threatening us not to good reviews”)

Moreover, we find it interesting that My Security Center believe they have many satisfied customers. In the free debates on the Internet, those that have not yet been censored, you get a somewhat different picture. The comments on the articles above is a fine example. More examples can be found here, here, here, here, here, here, here, here, here, here, here, here, here and here. And here it is even claimed that My Security Center is a virus. We believe this is not technically correct, but there is still a long way from the free debates on the internet to the picture painted by My Security Center themselves. Of course we have also had their software installed for testing, but it has certainly not increased our enthusiasm. In fact, it only confirmed what one can read about the program in the free debates on the internet.

Update July 2011: see no reason why people should not judge for themselves in this case.
The program review that all the fuss is about can currently be found here:
Note that you can continue to sign up for the “MSC Response Team”. There you will have the opportunity to take an active part in the struggle for freedom of speech.

We have also been in contact with Privatliv.Webs and can tell you that the threats from Janus Rægaard Nielsen has so far proved to be completely empty. Despite repeated promises to the contrary, no court case has been started. Several others have also been threatened, where it also turned out to be empty threats, presumably because Janus (or at least his lawyer) recognize how weak a case they have.
We can only repeat the previous message that Janus and MySecurityCenter is apparently having a hard time understanding:

You cannot threaten yourself to good reviews!

Update March 2012:
In addition to their anti-virus software MySecurityCenter has also launched a similar program for the smartphone operating system Android, the so-called MYAndroid Protection Antivirus, also known as MYMobile Security. Here you can read about recent tests of this type of antivirus:
De fleste antivirus-programmer til Android er værdiløse
(Most antivirus programs for Android is worthless)

Quote: “There are also six programs that have received a special award.
They are not able to recognize a single one of the 618 types of malware. The only thing they do is to take up space on the Android device. The six at the bottom are Android Antivirus Android Defender, LabMSF Antivirus beta, MobileBot Antivirus, MT Antivirus and MYAndroid Protection Antivirus.”

So again an absolute last place for My Security Center, and another test to confirm the results of the test that Spywarefri was threatened to remove from their website.

Update March 2012:
The above test has now been
criticized and edited. From an absolute bottom position MYAndroid Protection Antivirus is now at the top. One can only hope that the good test results are obtained in honest ways, and not again by threatening its critics into silence.

Update December 2012:
Janus has again tried to threaten people into silence. As pointed out elsewhere, it is interesting to see how Janus thanks Thomas Andersen for criticism of My Security Center. Quote: “By the way, we no longer sell CA eTrust that you correctly point out isn’t the worlds best. And I would very much like to thank you for that. It was not least your persistent criticism of us and our products that made us change.”
His “thank you” to Thomas Andersen was to sue him!

Thomas Andersen’s own view on the case can be read here: Den Personlige (The Personal One)
Note how he had to give up his freedom of speech and withdraw the review of MySecurityCenter, completely without regard to whether what he wrote was true or false. How can we claim to have freedom of speech in Denmark, when you can tell the truth and be punished for it?

Update March 2016:
A very similar case is now going on between the (close to) rogue anti-virus firm Enigma Software and the website Just like MySecurityCenter, Enigma Software clearly do not welcome criticism of their anti-virus program, SpyHunter, which incidentally we have for a long time been able to warn users against.