Diebold Rejected in Copyright Takedown Attempt 172
JimMarch(equalccw) writes "Our favorite crooked voting company Diebold has lost a MAJOR copyright
case (click
for ruling here or description
here). Short form: Diebold's internal documents (key
excerpts here and
here and here) and code were
floated all over the 'net last year, showing all kinds of horror.
Diebold filed cease'n'desist notices under the DMCA (such as mine linked here);
a court has now ruled that Diebold wrongfully abused the DMCA by issuing these takedown notices about materials that they knew were not covered by their copyright."
So, when's the perjury trial? (Score:5, Interesting)
Bet they're well enough connected that none of them will be prosecuted for it, though.
Re:So, when's the perjury trial? (Score:2, Funny)
When hell freezes over and the Cubs face the Red Sox in the world series. Ashcroft would probably have to bring the case.
And what... (Score:3, Funny)
No, Ashcroft bringing a case against Diebold is a sign of the Apocalypse.
So to you hell freezing over and the Cubs in the world series just means it's Tuesday?
Re:So, when's the perjury trial? (Score:5, Funny)
It all hinges on what's the definition of "is."
Here is the key part - and the RIAA better watch (Score:2, Interesting)
Under this standard, using bots to send automatic DMCA notices based on file names, would fail this legal test, and thus the sender of such a notice (RIAA) would violate the DMCA
Re:So, when's the perjury trial? (Score:5, Interesting)
Basically they stated, under penalty of perjury, that my customer was using, without proper license, works of a copyright holder that SABAM represented. Well, that customer was using _my_ original work, under my permission. And I never appointed SABAM as my representant.
I made a telephone call to the representant, spelling out that she was committing an act of perjury by stating that she represented the rightful copyright holder. She quickly backed up, but I warned that if this would happen a second time, I would not hesitate to file a criminal complaint.
I rather have people illegally enjoying my copyrighted works then some criminal association illegally claiming that they represent me.
Yes, I consider SABAM criminal. Perjury _is_ a criminal offense.
Re:So, when's the perjury trial? (Score:5, Insightful)
A fellow I know (not too well) publishes his own music on his ISPs web access. He doesn't go over quote, it's there for download, he states quite plainly that it's his own work, but it doesn't stop the occasional moron writing him email about piracy, illegally putting music online etc. When those letters go to the ISP, they HAVE pulled his site. It's been reinstated, and he's moves ISP, but the problem still remains.
Thanks to media soundbites that state little more than "copying music online is illegal" the world is getting the impression that unless you're a big media company, it's just plain illegal to distribute ANY music online.
That attitude problem is worse than any law, a law which can be repealed if it's wrong. The attitudes tend to entrench themselves in peoples consciousness for a generation.
Re:So, when's the perjury trial? (Score:2)
Wouldn't it make more sense to keep the ISP? Now, at least that ISP knows that he is distributing his own music and can tell anyone who may contact them that. If he switches, then he must go through the whole process over again.
Re:So, when's the perjury trial? (Score:2)
That only works if there are ISPs that won't cave that first time. My point is that this is normal behavior for an ISP. As a result, you will have to switch *every* time. If you stay with the original ISP, they might behave better next time.
No penalty of perjury (Score:5, Informative)
Re:No penalty of perjury (Score:2, Interesting)
If that isn't perjury, then I can claim to be the copyright holder of anything, send a takedown notice, and not be guilty of perjury since I did not lie about being a representative of myself.
Re:No penalty of perjury (Score:2)
Re:No penalty of perjury (Score:2)
It is a large club which is available to be wielded by King Kong-like companies without fear of reprisal if they turn out to be lying.
Sounds about right - the campaign-spending issue means that those King Kongs own (as in the sense of having purchased) the lawmaking machinery.
Re:No penalty of perjury (Score:2)
Re:No penalty of perjury (Score:2)
Re:No penalty of perjury (Score:2)
Re:"Good Faith belief" (Score:3, Interesting)
Good faith belief is a higher standard than mere belief. So if the DMCA requires good faith, this is a good thing. (that is to say the words "good faith" didn't lower the standard themselves).
It is not enough to simply claim good faith, for good faith to exist. good faith must be based on some kind objective reasons and you are not simply choosing to believe something because
Sweet (Score:4, Interesting)
A few more f*ckups like this, and we might be able to succesfuly repeal this legislation based on how vague it is, and the potential for abuse that it offers.
Not that I'm against copyrights... Just the over-extension of those rights.
Wrong! (Score:2, Insightful)
Re:Sweet (Score:5, Informative)
Unusually for a DMCA story, this part of the law is being used in exactly the way it was intended.
In Other News (Score:4, Funny)
Re:Sweet (Score:2)
I'm glad this was modded as 'Interesting' and not 'Insightful'.
I'm not trying to flame here, you have a decent point. However when courts decide you can or can't do this or that under a certain piece of legislation it usually doesn't make the entire work invalid or put lawmakers back to work re-writing it. It would be nice, but State and Federal Co
The Dead Zone (somewhat OT) (Score:2)
If you haven't seen it, do so. I don't want to include spoilers, but kudos to the writers for their work!
Copywrite Infringement (Score:5, Interesting)
This is a relatively clear instance of attempted legal intimidation, a common tactic used by companies with the financial and legal clout.
I really love the part where they describe "encouraging and assisting in the circumvention of copywrite protection systems". Seems like quite a stretch to me.
Re:Copywrite Infringement (Score:2)
Is a person who makes copies a copywright?
Re:Copywrite Infringement (Score:2, Insightful)
Do they really use that wording, "copywrite protection system"? Because if they do, it really shows that they are either clueless or actively supporting the newspeak "copy protection is copyright protection" which seems to have become prevalant lately.
To clairify,
Copyright protection is the system of laws which protect copyrighted works.
Copy protection is features added to a work to make it more difficult to duplicate.
The difference is that duplication of a work may not violate copyright law (fair use
Erm... Copy*right* (was Re:Copywrite Infringement) (Score:2)
Normally I'm not Kommandant Grammar. However, this one is really important, because meaning can easily drift here.
It's copyright and copyright protected (or copyrighted). Not copywrite or copywritten. This is so important because it isn't about authorship, it's about distribution and publishing rights. Copyright is the right to copy.
Copyright law says that when I create a work, I'm granted an exclusive right to control h
The real problem (Score:3, Funny)
You laugh but... (Score:2)
A question: Has anyone put together an Open Source voting protocol?
+1
Re:You laugh but... (Score:3, Funny)
I think Diebold has. One line of code from their source explains it all...
if (vote = GW_BUSH) {
That's subtly hilarious. (Score:2)
"Assign the value GW_BUSH to the variable vote. Then do the code in the curly braces no matter what the old value of vote was."
Heh.
Re:That's subtly hilarious. (Score:2, Informative)
Re:That's subtly hilarious. (Score:2)
Eh, it amused me at any rate.
Re:That's subtly hilarious. (Score:2)
Diebold may have failed to take the excerpts down (Score:4, Funny)
Re:Diebold may have failed to take the excerpts do (Score:2)
Just the fact that.... (Score:5, Interesting)
Most people would be intimidated with such a letter, and comply with out due to lack of resources or in pursuing/challenging it's validity. This, and the absence of any timely deterrent (fines, punishment) further encourages Diebold/RIAA/SCO and their ilk to use meaningless C&D and lawsuits as an intimidation and FUD technique without any approval from the legal system.
Re:Just the fact that.... (Score:2, Insightful)
"The purpose of the lawsuit is to harass and discourage, rather than to win." "If possible, of course, ruin him utterly." - L Ron Hubbard
My Obligatory Diebold Link: (Score:5, Interesting)
Get Involved (Score:5, Insightful)
Get Involved & Protest (Score:3, Interesting)
That is exactly what I propose, in sorts. If you arrive at your polling place a face problems, sit down, don't move until you are arrested. If your voter touch screen malfunctions - don't leave the booth until your true vote is counted.
The only way to fight problems, as they arise on election day, is to get arrested and have your case heard in front of a judge. The polling people don't care, the cops don't care, no one
Re:Get Involved & Protest (Score:3)
Re:Get Involved & Protest (Score:2)
Re:Get Involved (Score:2)
The other side of the issue, I guess, is that the staffers probably just tally
WTH? (Score:5, Insightful)
Then, FINE FINE FINE!
Diebold violates a persons civil rights, uses the DMCA to do it, gets caught... Bad Diebold, no no!
Something about that just doesn't quite sound right.... Okay, let's see...
I do something, like, ohhh -- say decrypt a satellite signal (which, mind you, is pouncing down on MY ROOF 24/7..) - I go to jail....then when I get out I have fines to pay that will take the majority of my paycheck for years to come.
Okay, now... Diebold threatens a person, causes great anguish in this persons life, forces said person to hire legal council.... basically, makes a significant impact on said persons life...
Diebold, bad, no no - don't do that again! Please? Please don't do that again?
Riiiiiiight... Okay, methinks this sucks!
Re:WTH? (Score:5, Funny)
If God had intended people to be more powerful than croporations, it would have endowed them with a dollar generator!
Re:WTH? (Score:2)
More generally "Bad corp, don't do it again. (Or you'll get told off again.)"
IIRC corporate crime is very damaging to both people and economies, yet most law enforcement ignores it.
Exactly! (Score:4, Insightful)
They do for the most part, but (Score:4, Interesting)
Ever notice how the rich get treated with kid gloves? It is because they can afford to be well represented. Money talks in our legal system, and most of us don't have much of it.
Didn't you RTFA? (Score:2)
Re:Didn't you RTFA? (Score:2)
Re:WTH? (Score:2)
Re:WTH? (Score:2)
Then how do you explain the war on drugs, or laws against suicide? Sure they might be against what the Constitution spells out, but that hasn't stopped them from stepping out of their boundries in the first place.
Re:WTH? (Score:2)
The original Ford Mustang gas tank is an example, story here [cbsnews.com].
Re:WTH? (Score:3, Informative)
Recall the McDonald's hot coffee lawsuit. McDonald's was selling a product that THEY knew would cause 2nd and 3rd degree burns, and they knew that people would put it in their lap, and they knew that some people would spill it. BUYERS, on the other hand, thought they were buying a product that was hot and would cause discomfort or 1st degree burns at worst.
Who, then
Re:WTH? (Score:2)
Interesting note: some scholars think that the ruling was an improper read of a SC clerk's writings. Ye gods, the whole corp-is-a-person nonsense may be based on a legal error!
Um, just to toss in a comment: Corps may have the same rights as an individual, but they have none of the responsiblities of an individual. The "responsibility for your own actions" that conservative people bel
Re:WTH? (Score:5, Insightful)
I agree with his sentiment. Corporations should NOT be treated as personages, but as extensions of the owners (shareholders) and controllers (CEO, board of directors, shareholders, etc). Thus if a companies executives (controllers) make a decision that is illegal, they should be held responsible for that decision in the same fashion that any individual would be (such as you, sirwired). This would have a large effect on the behavior of companies, and who was willing to invest in a company.
If, for example, I knew that, as a shareholder, I could be held partly responsible for the behavior of any company in which I invested, then I would be VERY careful about what companies I gave my money to as an investment. I would also, along with most other people, monitor their activity very closely, and tell that company to cut it out if they started misbehaving.
In the current system, there is little, if any, check to the behavior of a company. M$'s anti-trust suit is an example of how big money can affect the ability of a company to do whatever they like.
I am not a fan of big government, or big business. Both should be small enough to feel the forces of economic shifts. M$ arguably is immune to this, because they have such a broad array of patents and cash.
There are two major things that can be done to encourage competition and good behavior. First, limit the holding of all copyrights and patents to 5 years, non-extensible--for all cases in which a company is the controlling entity in the use of either. In cases where an individual is the controlling entity (such as a book author), copyright should be granted for the life of the individual, for that individual (that is, if the individual decides to sell the copyright to a company, rather than lease that copyright, then it would expire in 5 years). This scenario would also work for patents. This would give individuals sufficient incentive to innovate outside of the corporate stronghold, but keep companies from sitting on patents and copyrights indefinitely (aka Disney).
The second I have already covered--the treatment of the executors of a company as wholly responsible for the actions of that company.
The laws around this would have to be carefully written to close loopholes to the intent of the law, and to prevent certain possible abuses, but I feel that this would have several effects:
First, companies, guided by the executors, would behave more responsibly, driven by the fear of real consequences.
Secondly, the current bevy of lawsuits over patents would be limited to recent innovations. Companies would no longer be able to worry about the infringement of patents years old.
Third, companies would be forced to innovate quickly. In order to stay ahead of the competition and be certain that money would still roll in 5 years down the road, there would need to be constant innovation. This need for near instant invention of new processes and products would generate a large number of highly technical and skilled jobs--the kind that pay. This would give jobs to those who are exiting school with the good technical (probably engineering, but other areas too) skills. Older workers are protected by the ADEA to a certain degree, and would be able to leverage experience and supervision skills to remain a viable part of the work-force.
Fourth, as companies realize the need for a better educated work force, many would begin to fund private schools in a fashion that they would be available even for those who could not otherwise afford it. Public schools would also get some benefit from this as well.
There is a personal benefit in this two--as the need for a more technical and capable work force emerges, there will be a need for those who are skilled in devising a method to select, hire and motivate these individuals. That is my area of expertise (besides incredibly insightful social commentary--') ).
I've rambled, but really, what I am trying to say is that I am glad Diebold lost, now here's hoping they get hit with a real penalty...
Mainstream media still doesn't know (Score:5, Insightful)
Re:Mainstream media still doesn't know (Score:3, Funny)
NPR reported on this... (Score:2, Informative)
Actually, they do know (Score:2, Informative)
http://money.cnn.com/2004/08/30/technology/ e lectio n_diebold/
http://www.cnn.com/2004/LAW/09/28/rama sastry.votin gmachines/
MSNBC:
http://msnbc.msn.com/id/5937115/
IMHO this issue has gotten decent (but not perfect) coverage in the mainstream media. Having said that, they do not go much into the technical details, but look at their audience. While I agree that it is crappy that thinks like the Kobe trial get more coverage, to say that the 'Mainstream media still doesn't know' is inaccurate.
So what is the punishement? (Score:5, Interesting)
Re:So what is the punishement? (Score:2)
Re:So what is the punishement? (Score:2)
From my reading of the decision it sounds ike Diebold _are_ going to have to cover costs, attorneys fees etc. as per (2) above.
That said, I think that is all they are getting hit for - ie. no punitive damages.
Re:So what is the punishement? (Score:2)
[from page 13 of the pdf]:
The fact that Diebold never actually brought suit against any alleged infringer suggests strongly that Diebold sought to use the DMCA's safe harbor provisions - which were designed to protect ISPs, not copyright holders - as a sword to suppress publication of embarrssing content rather than as a shield to protect its intellectual property.
[From page 15 of the pdf - boldness added for emphasis]:
(4) Within ten (10) day
Re:So what is the punishement? (Score:2)
Sorry about the typo your Honor.
Ebbs anf Flows (Score:5, Insightful)
I wonder if there is an equilibrium point where things settle down (i.e. laws repealed, corrected etc.) before the next round of political changes bring in a whole hoopla of new ones for people to have a crack at. All historians will probably turn round (correctly) and say "yes, but it takes a serious revolution to rebalance the pendulum, but maybe there's another point of transcendence e.g. saturation of the legal profession.
Just wibbling away, please feel free to add wibble.
Stokey
Making a killing in the voting-machine biz (Score:4, Interesting)
1) Voting machines are running webpages in kiosk mode.
2) Web/database server set up to receive votes. Second backup server up and running and ready to go if there's a problem.
3) All votes are recorded THRICE... once to the "main" database, once to the second backup server database within a transaction, and once... printing out each vote, at the point of voting, line-by-line to one of 2 dot-matrix printers!
Redundancies: If a client machine goes down, replacing it with another one is easy. If the server goes down, there is always the other one. If the printer goes down or runs out of ink or paper, you swap it with the other one (maybe have a 3rd as spare).
The only hack this would require is getting an old dot-matrix printer to talk to a modern server and only print out one line at a time.
The software part is E-Z. And the clients would of course have touchscreens.
Now go make a killing off my idea. Just credit "Lectrick", a mysterious man from the Net underground...
Re:Making a killing in the voting-machine biz (Score:4, Funny)
Re:Making a killing in the voting-machine biz (Score:2)
Re:Making a killing in the voting-machine biz (Score:2)
The ballot is presented electronically. People can choose to view the ballot or have it read to them. People either touch the screen to mark their candidate or press a button at the appropriate time when the list of candidates is read to them. The voter can zoom in or increase the font size if needed.
After the ballot is completed, the person is either shown on screen or i
Re:Making a killing in the voting-machine biz (Score:2)
Right here you have an excellent way to abuse the system.
The problem with your otherwise excellent proposed mechanism is that very, very few people know how to read a barcode. As such, they have no way to visually ensure that the name on the ballot matches up with the barcode on the ballot.
You need to replace this with something which is veri
Re:Making a killing in the voting-machine biz (Score:2)
He covered that. The barcode is in addition to large, clear printed text. You can check for corruption by picking some ballot boxes at random, hand-tallying the votes based on the printed text and comparing that to the scanned totals for that box. If they differ, you go back and manually re-count the election based on the printed text the same as we do now (except that with computer-printed text you don't have to worry about illegible or unclear ballots).
Re:Making a killing in the voting-machine biz (Score:2)
I read what was said -- it makes no difference. The first line of defence in ensuring a given vote is accurate is the voter themselves. If they see that the text portion of their ballot doesn't correspond to the machine-readable portion, they can report it. If you use a barcode for the machine-readable portion, the voter has no way of readily ensuring that the text portion and the barcode portion match.
Yes, you can verify wether
Re:Making a killing in the voting-machine biz (Score:2)
Re:Making a killing in the voting-machine biz (Score:2)
You missed the point, there is no need to verify the bar code matches. With random bar code to name matching, if there were systems that were tampered with, they will be caught. The names themselves can be OCR'd and compared to the bar code. In short, there is absolutely no way an election could be influenced with a large number of ballots with a bar code that doesn
Re:Making a killing in the voting-machine biz (Score:2)
There's no real way to tell the voter that the machine actually counted the vote that as it was cast. Any hack that
Re:Making a killing in the voting-machine biz (Score:2)
True, but it's hard to make something that's both human-readable and convenient for machine input. Even with computer-printed text I'm uncomfortable with the OCR error rate. But in the end the printed human-readable text takes priority over the barcode, so if the barcode's altered it's just a matter of detecting the mismatch. That can be done, as I said, by random validation. If someone alters any more than a handful of ballots it's going to be hard to avoid having a random validation catch at least a few o
Actually... (Score:3, Informative)
All you have to do is plug it in, assuming you're using some variant or UNIX/BSD/Linux.
The real hack with your system would be making it not possible to figure out how someone voted by corellating the vote log and the elector log (who voted already).
The problem with touchscreen voting is that the voter has no way of knowing the vote they entered is the vote that was recor
Is it just me... (Score:5, Interesting)
It's usually, "Microsoft Patents Breathing" or "RIAA shoots two 6-year old copyright violators", but these are actually starting to restore my faith in humanity. Not that much, but a little bit.
Re:Is it just me... (Score:2)
Re:Is it just me... (Score:2)
Isn't there a quote about people enduring as much oppression as they will tolerate? (i.e. no more, no less)
Re:Is it just me... (Score:2)
I most certainly don't agree with that, but I think the OP may find some grounds for hope in the fact
the NY Times has, at best, a Campaign2004 section. That's insufficient, IMHO, because it allows them to get lost in the strategic details of the election, and to talk about how well the candidates carried themselves, rather than the vali
the press..? (Score:4, Interesting)
maybe they will give in and run this. So here are some contacts:
Nightly@NBC.com
http://www.abcnews.go
cbsnews.com click on contact us
http://www.cnn.com/feedback/tips/
I know they know about this, but maybe they dont know how much we already know.
rightful abuse? (Score:5, Funny)
a court has now ruled that Diebold wrongfully abused the DMCA
...So wait, is there a way to rightfully abuse the DMCA?
Or does simply using the DMCA count as abuse?
Summary misses the most important part (Score:5, Interesting)
The article summary didn't even mention what I think is the best part of this ruling. The summary makes it sound like Diebold didn't own the copyright on the materials it ordered be taken down, but Diebold clearly does own the copyright. So what's the basis for ruling that the takedown notice was improper?
Fair Use. The judge says that the posting of the material did not constitute infringement because it "was posted or hyperlinked to for the purpose of informing the public about the problems associated with Diebold's electronic voting machines." Since the posting was in the interest of public discussion, it was Fair Use, and Diebold knew that, or should have known it, and not issued the takedown notices.
It's nice to see that even if no one in the legislature seems to understand the concept of Fair Use, the judges haven't forgotten it.
It would be even nicer if Diebold received a stiff fine for abusing the process, above and beyond the damages and legal fees they're going to be ordered to pay. The dangerous power of the DMCA "safe harbor" provisions would be significantly reduced if copyright owners had to worry about getting slapped down, hard, for using it inappropriately.
Important Precedent (Score:5, Insightful)
Essentially the defendants were trying to use law to suppress an internal email trail which was embarassing to them and, not knowing how the stuff got out, tried to bully ISPs to take the stuff down (yes, I know the section of the DMCA is supposed to be a "get out" clause for ISPs, but does anyone really think that was ever how it was intended to be used?).
Now that this has been judged an unlawful act, I would like to think that the bar has been raised for any potential future litigants.
Double negative? (Score:4, Interesting)
Re:Double negative? (Score:3, Informative)
Re:Double negative? (Score:3, Funny)
No no no, it just means that they need some remedial training so they can abuse it correctly next time.
HTH, HAND
--
Free gmail invites [slashdot.org]
The REAL problem here... (Score:5, Funny)
What'll those crazy unelected judges do next?! If we're not careful, soon they'll be "enforcing the Constitution" or some other such nonsense.
(For the humor impaired, this is not a troll.)
Killed two birds with one stone... (Score:4, Interesting)
Here's how.
1. Rule against Diebold, now all knows truth.
2. Rule the DMCA is being abused, that's one ruling AGAINST DMCA.
Slashdot did what Diebold/DCMA couldn't (Score:3, Funny)
Guess Diebold should have just posted to slashdot to get the documents removed from the internet.
Perhaps slashdot should consider a [cache] link for each link since this is such a regular occurence.
-- Greg
And yet. . . (Score:2)
Particularly when Theresa LePore [independent.co.uk], despite her strong-arming the debacle in 2000 is still elections supervisor in Florida.
Those stupid machines, many of which remain installed all over the country, are just a small part of the total corruption.
If Bush doesn't win, it'll be because the script calls for him not to.
Kerry has stated numerous times that he fully intends to continue and enlarge the 'war against terrorism', s
Get the memos from the Swarthmore students (Score:2, Insightful)
Also, if you are a student, or you know students who are interested in copyfighting/freedom of speech, please head on over to FreeCulture.org [freeculture.org], an international student movement fo
Re:Striking Blow for Imperial America! (Score:2, Insightful)
This really has nothing to do with Homeland Security though some folks sure do go to great lengths to try to make these connections no matter how specious the arguments they have to put forth.
Re:Diebold on the cutting edge (Score:2, Funny)
Supersize your vote? (Score:2)
Re:"Abused" the DMCA? (Score:2, Interesting)
There's a right way and a wrong way to abuse the DMCA. Diebold chose the wrong way.
Re:"Abused" the DMCA? (Score:2)