Slashdot Log In
Students, ISP Sue Diebold
Posted by
timothy
on Mon Nov 03, 2003 06:59 PM
from the wiping-the-egg-around dept.
from the wiping-the-egg-around dept.
Quixotic1 writes "The campaign against Diebold that began as electronic civil disobedience took an exciting turn today as the EFF announced that they were filing suit against Diebold for abuse of copyright claims. They will be representing Swarthmore College students and the ISP Online Policy Group, who hosted and linked to copies of controversial internal memos."
This discussion has been archived.
No new comments can be posted.
The Fine Print: The following comments are owned by whoever posted them. We are not responsible for them in any way.
You can kill a revolutionary (Score:4, Funny)
Re:You can kill a revolutionary (Score:5, Funny)
I prefer voting. The revolutionary business doesn't pay well, and the hours suck.
Parent
Re:You can kill a revolutionary (Score:5, Funny)
Parent
Re:You can kill a revolutionary (Score:3, Funny)
Give him a 30 year fixed mortgage.
Re:You can kill a revolutionary (Score:4, Interesting)
Yeah, I know it's a joke but I'll bite anyways. The problem with revolutions is that they tend to get a lot of other people killed as well, not just revolutionaries, in fact a lot more often than is desirable the people who win the revolution are not the people generally desired to lead but the ones who are most successful at killing the other side. Always remember
dreams of perfect society + bloody revolution = bloody dictatorship
That being said there becomes a point where a political system degrades far enough some kind of revolution may be in the long term interest. If this Diebold problem isn't fixed fast (i.e.before the next US presidential election) than the US may find the foundations of their political system in very serious trouble. No I'm not saying you guys should have a revolution
Parent
Re:You can kill a revolutionary (Score:3, Informative)
Afraid I'm not super familiar with the american revolution but I think I'd tend to classify it more as a liberation than a revolution. From what I understand British loyalists would of been a minority and probably socially segregated for the most part. Either way the actual battles would of generally been local militants against forgien military in a time when military technology was simple enough that both had an eq
Re:You can kill a revolutionary (Score:3, Interesting)
Is it any wonder the liberal line is to claim the 2nd amendment doesn't apply to "the people"?
Personally I think that guns for revolution in modern states are kind of obselete. True it can cause big problems for the military (as a previous poster mentioned of Iraq) but for a revolution in a modern country I've always t
Re:You can kill a revolutionary (Score:5, Insightful)
Try this quote, instead: "Power comes from the end of a gun." Considering that quote is from someone who actually seized power over a country with hundreds of millions of people and not a wide-eyed visionary novelist, I think it delivers a more powerful statement.
Parent
Re:You can kill a revolutionary (Score:3, Interesting)
You must be in another world! :p
The populace is armed, but not trained. Just having a heavily armed group of people does not a standing army make. Few people in this country are capable of fighting the trained, organized military that's in place. Consider that even during the American revolution the British would've pretty much rolled right over the colonies given a moderate amount of time. Outside intervention and mercs, particularly from the Germans, helped turn the tide of the war in favor of the co
Re:You can kill a revolutionary (Score:4, Insightful)
I wasn't aware that the general american populace had access to something more sophisticated than surface to air heat seeking rockets.
Parent
Memos (Score:3, Insightful)
Awesome (Score:5, Interesting)
"Diebold's blanket cease-and-desist notices are a blatant abuse of copyright law," said EFF Staff Attorney Wendy Seltzer. "Publication of the Diebold documents is clear fair use because of their importance to the public debate over the accuracy of electronic voting machines."
Indeed. Better still:
"Instead of paying lawyers to threaten its critics, Diebold should invest in creating electronic voting machines that include voter-verified paper ballots and other security protections," said EFF Legal Director Cindy Cohn.
Or just give up and leave it to someone else. Diebold's credibility is ruined, IMHO. If you don't agree, read those memos flying around. Systemic fraud exists in Diebold's practices. The should be nailed. And not like Enron, really nailed.
Re:Awesome (Score:5, Insightful)
I disagree. Most of the general public has never heard of them.
Parent
Re:Awesome (Score:3, Interesting)
Re:Awesome (Score:5, Insightful)
Parent
Radio coverage (Score:4, Informative)
http://www.npr.org/features/feature.php?wfId=14
Parent
Re:Awesome (Score:4, Informative)
Parent
browsable archive (Score:5, Informative)
http://tapdance.sourceforge.net/diebold/ [sourceforge.net]
hope this helps
Re:browsable archive (Score:5, Informative)
Parent
Shady? (Score:5, Interesting)
"Publication of the Diebold documents is clear fair use because of their importance to the public debate over the accuracy of electronic voting machines."
How that statement is going to hold up in court would be very interesting; it's debatable how much we the people (in the eyes of the court) should know about the internal workings.
For example, I'd imagine that's why we don't get to listen in on the Supreme Court's discussions; that's a basis for our democratic process, but we don't watch it, we aren't allowed to (no big fuss about that either).
Blah, I don't know what I'm talking about.
Sig & Below [sp00fed.net]
Re:Shady? (Score:5, Insightful)
- They show intent to break the law (among other things, patching an election system without having the patch certified, not to mention faking demonstrations for elections officials). You can't claim copyright on the plans to rob a bank and then complain when people start investigating.
- The work is factual. This isn't about pirating The Matrix or Britney Spears.
- The memos (themselves) are not marketable. Yes, of course, this will affect Diebold's business immensely. But the DMCA's fair use clause only applies to works that themselves have a market.
- They're fundamental to democracy -- and aren't checked in any other way. The Supreme Court can operate "in secret" (though it's not really all that secret) because they are checked by the Congress. We have no mechanism for impeaching Diebold, especially if they cloud all of their vote-counting procedures under trade secrets or spurious claims of copyright(-infringement).
I would say, in fact, that this is one of the most solid copyright-contesting cases to come along in a while.
--
Parent
Quick general question... (Score:4, Insightful)
If they wanted to protect the information, couldn't they invoke Trade Secrets? It would seem to me a better path than copyright.
Of course, couldn't Diebold be liable for sedition? They are trying to usurp the power of the election, something clearly listed and enumerated in the Constitution. Of course, I'm not a lawyer, check out the wording.
http://www4.law.cornell.edu/uscode/18/2384.html
Parent
Re:Shady? (Score:4, Informative)
Parent
Re:Shady? (Score:3, Insightful)
Re:Shady? (Score:4, Insightful)
I regret to say that I must agree with you: This case is going to be a tough one for the EFF.
The primary problem is that past court cases have already "settled" the question of public interest vs. copyright. Sadly, the courts decided that copyright trumps compelling public interest, and that copyright holders can silence any critics who attempt to use their own words against them in the theater of public debate. These decisions were sought and obtained by the Scientology cult.
Schwab
Parent
Scientology argument ain't the same... (Score:5, Insightful)
So there is a difference between these cases.
Parent
Re:Once it is known... (Score:3, Interesting)
Re:Once it is known... (Score:3, Interesting)
I recall reading an article on CNN a couple years ago (if anyone has a link, please post -- tried to find it quickly but was unable) where a guy received a nasty C&D letter when he posted a copy of his state laws on the Internet.
Apparently his state had contracted a publisher to print books with all the state laws. Said publisher cl
Lots of interesting issues here. (Score:5, Interesting)
If I was a (hypothetical) member of the Diebold mailing list, and there were a few e-mails in that bunch that I authored, do I retain copyright on my e-mail? I always assumed I was offering a non-exclusive right to the audience of the list to read/retain/copy/etc., but if that audience increases without my knowledge or consent do I lose the legal right to complain?
When the media reports on specific items in the memos, do lawyers/judges figure the toothpaste is pretty much out of the tube at this point or is there the possibility of going after reporters?
Re:Lots of interesting issues here. (Score:4, Insightful)
But copyright does not trump all other interests, specifically copyright does not prevent the documents from being used in a criminal investigation or civil discovery action. It doesn't even prevent the documents from being used in making arguments to open a criminal investigation or initiate a civil suit.
IMHO (and as a non-lawyer who has a strong professional interest in civil liberties) what Diebold is doing is legally no different from some sick bastard who videotapes himself drugging and raping women trying to prevent his victims from taking the video to the police. The harm caused by allowing the complaints to be squelched is far greater than the harm caused by forcing disclosure against the wishes of the copyright holder.
Now if Diebold was sending C&D orders to prevent their inclusion in a general interest book on computer voting systems... then they might have a case. In that case the memos would be used to enrich somebody else, not to call attention to a matter of critical public interest.
Parent
Diebold is winning (Score:5, Funny)
You have the right not to vote. Any vote you make can be used against you in a court of law. The judge presiding in such a court of law may be appointed by Diebold, Inc., and need not require a jury, but if a jury is summoned, it need not be a jury of your peers.
By acting to vote you consent to our determining whether your vote is valid, and in the event it is judged not to be valid, you consent to our voiding your vote and further voiding your right to vote in the future.
You furthermore acknowledge that owing to storage and bandwidth limitations that Diebold, Inc., may experience, your vote may be digitally compressed in a way such that your true intent in casting the vote may be lost. If such an eventuality should occur, your vote may be determined using statistical data derived from any source we deem appropriate or convenient.
You have the right to protest if your vote is cancelled, altered, or in any way modified as the result of such action on our part, however, you hereby acknowledge that in such an eventuality, Diebold, Inc. may determine that your right to vote is deleterious to democracy as implement by Diebold, Inc., and therefore may be considered to be an overt act against the national security of these United States.
You have 10 seconds to comply.
God Bless America.
Donate (Score:5, Insightful)
If you agree with EFF's decision to stand up... (Score:5, Informative)
I just gave the EFF money ... (Score:5, Insightful)
Just demand a recount. (Score:4, Insightful)
Sorry, they've got that covered. (Score:3, Interesting)
How I wish.
But they covered that: If you demand a manual recount, they print the database as hardcopy individual ballots, for humans to hand count.
Of course the count comes out the same. (Unless a human goofs, of course.)
And of course if the issue was that the database was corrupted, the recount means nothing.
I'm a poor student livin' on loans (Score:5, Interesting)
I really encourage everyone to do the same. Lawsuits don't come cheaply.
James
If you want it done right... (Score:5, Interesting)
Seems like a no-brainer to me.
Vegas Baby, Vegas (Score:5, Insightful)
Parent
Get out the vote! (Score:3, Funny)
Punch in your vote, pull the lever, get a receipt and maybe a jackpot!
since so many are passionate about this (Score:3, Insightful)
There seems to be many, many people who are very passionate about this issue. Why can't someone produce a talented team to produce a free, open source alternative to Diebold's system and then pitch it to concerned governments?
Re:since so many are passionate about this (Score:3, Informative)
Reminds me so much of MS (Score:4, Interesting)
"4K Smart cards which had never been previously programmed are being recognized by the Card Manager as manager cards."
Reminds me of the Win2K/XP feature that makes you an Admin if you insert an install disk.
NPR (Score:4, Interesting)
All Things Considered ran a good overview [npr.org] tonight of the Diebold story.
Cited are critiques of security and even poor code quality, the guts of internal memos now floating around, Diebold's threats against ISPs, and comments from the EFF.
(Runtime, 4:50; RealPlayer or WMP required)
Was the voting software written off-shore? (Score:3, Interesting)
Nitya Varadarajan
Chennai, March 7: Diebold HMA, a joint venture with 50:50 holding between Diebold Inc and HMA Data Systems in Chennai, will be expanding its software development operations for Diebold Inc's operations worldwide
Court Documents (Score:3, Insightful)
Where to sue? Venue counts... (Score:5, Informative)
The Constitution of NH includes as Article 10:
[Art.] 10. [Right of Revolution.] Government being instituted for the common benefit, protection, and security, of the whole community, and not for the private interest or emolument of any one man, family, or class of men; therefore, whenever the ends of government are perverted, and public liberty manifestly endangered, and all other means of redress are ineffectual, the people may, and of right ought to reform the old, or establish a new government. The doctrine of nonresistance ag ainst arbitrary power, and oppression, is absurd, slavish, and destructive of the good and happiness of mankind.
This is one of the most clearly delineated passages anywhere in American law pertaining to the ultimate rights and, more importantly, RESPONSIBILITIES of citizens.
Vermont (Score:5, Funny)
Democracy at its root (Score:5, Insightful)
But this is a fight we have to take on locally. Find out what's used in your district. If they use black-box machines with no paper trail (virtually everyone does) then hit 'em with a big ole ream of this [ratm.net]. Send it your city councilmember, call your Congresscritter [house.gov] and your Senators [senate.gov], bitch to your local paper, blog. Do something.
My favourite excerpts:
Or how about:
Or even:
Makes me feel all warm and gooey inside, but not in that comfortable, sated, internally glowing way. In that queasy, rumbling, internally bleeding, hosting-an-Alien-baby kind of way.
Great scheduling (Score:4, Interesting)
It's not clear whether they'll win a preliminary injunction, but there's a good chance of it. Either way, it's great PR.