News 

The suit, filed 26 June was barely a day prior to Microsoft announcing changes to the tool, which verifies the authenticity of Windows installations.

The suit was brought by Brian Johnson of LA, alleging that the WGA tool was delivered via a 'surreptitious' installation, and without the explicit consent of the user, while concealing 'material facts' about exactly what the WGA tool would do.

It seeks a class-action status and alleges that Microsoft has broken a variety of laws, both in Washington and California,

ADVERTISEMENT

including antipyware legislation, consumer protection laws and unfair competition requirements.

As well as unspecified damages, the suit also asks for an injunction to stop Microsoft continuing with its WGA rollout; that Microsoft deletes any data produced through the initiative; that Microsoft distributes any 'ill-gotten gains' accrued back to the plaintiff and others signed up to the class action; and that the assets of the WGA initiative be impounded to prevent Microsoft concealing or moving them.

Microsoft announced changes to its WGA tool 28 July which included a clear description of the purpose and function of WGA, options not to install it and making available instructions for those that wish to remove installations - clearly aimed at tackling the complaints in the suit. However, the company said the changes to WGA were in response to customer feedback.

Microsoft maintains that WGA is not spyware: 'WGA is installed with the consent of the user and seeks only to notify the user if a proper license is not in place. WGA is not spyware,' Microsoft said in a statement.