Slashdot Mirror
Students, ISP Sue Diebold
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."
...but you can't kill a revolution. You see this is why i favor revolution to voting. You don't run into these problems.
"It is not how things are in the world that is mystical, but that it exists." -Ludwig Wittgenstein
This is offtopic:
All the icons are broken and there are now dumbass smiley faces everywhere.
Those memos are very interesting. They show that the Diebold people did not care a bit for the elections.
503 Sig Unavailable
The Signature could not be accessed. Please try again later or contact the administrator
Fantastic. I was afraid Diebold might be able to C&D this under the rug, and even took (perhaps useless) precautions of "archiving" the incriminating memos in several places (floppies, p2ps, random servers for which I have pw's . . . ). But, it seems like this will see the light of day. This choice quote is a good summary:
"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.
everything in moderation
here are all the memos for your browsing pleasure:
http://tapdance.sourceforge.net/diebold/
hope this helps
Investing forum
From what I read in the article/press release by the EFF, this is going to be a fairly shaky case;
"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
Sig & Below
Yuck Fou
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?
Try not. Do or do not, there is no try.
-- Dr. Spock, stardate 2822-3.
Its nice to see the Memos will get to see "light of day" in court, or will they?
It will be interesting to see if the Judge decides to take the nature of the CONTENTS of the memos into account when deciding upon this case.
At any rate I look forward to following this case, I just hope it starts getting some national exposure. CNN reported on one aspect of this, however they did NOT mention the implications (or the validity) of the CONTENTS of the memos.
Pending: your vote is now the property of Diebold, Inc. Any attempt on your part to ascertain the disposition of your vote is hereby declared to be in violation of federal law, e.g., the Digital Millenium Copyright Act.
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.
"There are two major products that come out of Berkeley: LSD and UNIX. We don't believe this to be a coincidence."
IANAL
Copyright only applies to published works. Memos aren't published so they aren't copyrighted.
It's funny really, I would think Diebold would want to keep this a little lower profile, rather than involving all of these people who are obviously going to make a stink about this.
Now's a good time to Donate to the EFF. As we all now, small donations can add up to a lot, if people who care pitch in.
If you agree with the EFF's decision to stand up to Diebold, then I may suggest making a small donation to the EFF to show your support.
... and everyone else should too, if you can possibly afford it. This case is the tipping point for me. I've always admired the EFF's work, but most of it hasn't affected me personally. The voting machine issue affects everyone in the US, and given the importance of the US globally, everyone on Earth. Put your money where your mouth is.
The correlation between ignorance of statistics and using "correlation is not causation" as an argument is close to 1.
lets keep this evidence spreading
ed2k://|file|Diebold.Electronic.Voting.Memos.Li
If you want to cause trouble for them, just demand a recount. When it is found to be impossible, people will notice. For the conspiracy minded, notice that the loser didn't contest the election and demand a recount - This makes sense if you think they are all really on the same side and the public is the enemy. I'm not that cynical yet, but a lot of /. readers are :-)
Might be this?
It is debatable - perhaps the sooner this debate is held (although in which forum/s, is another matter for debate...) the better it is for the United States as a whole.
The Mothership
but I still scraped up 10$ and donated to the EFF using PayPal.
I really encourage everyone to do the same. Lawsuits don't come cheaply.
James
is it just me or do all the images seem to not be on the server? if i try to open one i get a 404. only the text on /. is dispalyed on the page. strange!
a freenet link to diebolds software and some other goodies.....
Z ZH 9CVJbDzg/diebold_software.html
CHK@kvumSmm1F-YjvRSMzh3rtFpehUQNAwI,OfEFlnXz7r4
or
Diebold Software [FREENET LINK]
Learn More about Freenet
Become a member -- the more people on their lists, the more respect they demand...
(Oh, and give them some money at the same time, obviously).
Hire the guys that create the lottery machines. They're incredibly secure, yet easy enough for convience store clerks to operate. Due to performance riders (the software company pays penalties if the system goes down) they're extremely stable. They sure as hell don't slip patches in when no one is looking.
Seems like a no-brainer to me.
What cod piece?
I really hope Slashdot isn't going to start using those stupid yellow smiley faces for friend foe etc. On a website that is mostly Black white and Green, little yellow circles are about the most annoying graphic that could be added.
If you wanna get rich, you know that payback is a bitch
If you want to cause trouble for them, just demand a recount. When it is found to be impossible, people will notice.
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.
Bantam Dominique roosters crow a four-note song. Once you've heard it as "Happy BIRTHday" you can't NOT hear it that way
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).
No, but assume someone did find memos from the Supreme court, that cast doubt over their competence at what they do. Could then the court use copyright law to stop everyone from discussing it? Is it reasonable to expect to be able to "put the cat back in the bag", and pretend it didn't happen, and sue anyone who says otherwise? I don't think copyright law was designed to act like a gag order law.
Kjella
Live today, because you never know what tomorrow brings
How can one of Bush's top fundraisers be allowed to run the company producing the computerized voting machines to tally his votes in the next coup de corp?
Check out this article on Democracy Now! for more info.
the underlying political process, it would be way more efficient to do something politically significant.
...
Fighting monied interests in court is not only a bit of a waste of time, but it fails to recognize that it is not the battlefield where the public (say, the small man) has a competitive advantage.
Are these people really the descendants of the guys who threw the Boston Tea Party? Two hundred years seem to be enough to kill the spirit. You wouldn't believe it
This case may not be as strong as it could be, but there's something really good that could come out of it.
The discovery process. I want to see documents presented in court that are imperative to the EFF's case that are absolutely incriminating to Diebold when it comes to voter fraud. If that stuff gets on the record, the news media is going to have a heyday.
This statement is false.
Companies usually make it clear that any work you do for them is theirs, including the creation of intellectual property. I would have thought such a thing was implicit until I worked at a place where some schmuck contractor dropped copyrights all over his code (back in the mid 80s) that he was specifically paid to create for the company.
Try not. Do or do not, there is no try.
-- Dr. Spock, stardate 2822-3.
My question is this:
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?
Wrong, copyright applies to every non-trivial work. Publication and intent to publish is largely irrelevant.
You don't even have to think hard to come up with countless examples of things that clearly need protection but are never published. All proprietary source code. All internal work product. All backup tapes and discs.
For every complex problem there is an answer that is clear, simple, and wrong. -- H L Mencken
Slot machines in Vegas don't serve the same purpose as voting machines, but the system set up to regulate those slot machines, their manufacture, programming, every part of their operation, is very secure. Voting machines are just another example of an industry prime for careful regulation.
I believe her's was also a remake. Prince originally wrote the song and it was on one of his early albums.
Favorite quote - at the bottom:
"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.
...since a revolution is a past event. An uprising can be beat down, if and only if it succeeds it'll become a revolution. Unfortunately, you can't skip to that part. Though I understand why certain politicians and a firing squad has a certain appeal...
Kjella
Live today, because you never know what tomorrow brings
Tie in voting with slot machines and people will vote in droves!
Punch in your vote, pull the lever, get a receipt and maybe a jackpot!
-- secret asIAN man (not Secret Asian Man)
All Things Considered ran a good overview 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)
and she was born in a bottle-rocket 1929.
Diebold HMA to become software-sourcing hub for Diebold Inc
... rest of article
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
What about spam email writers that claim copyright on their email? I've seen dozens of emails that say "this message is intended for recipient x. Delete if you are not recipient" etc. Does copyright on spam still apply?
all this happened right after water spilled in my motherboard, so that's comforting to hear.
mod parent redudant, diebold's machines ARE ALREADY lottery machines.
Once the originals of the memos have been presented in court don't they become something that anyone can read as part of the court record? If so at the least the EFF could post the court transcripts and make the memos public that way.
And NPR just ran a story on it
9 09 01
http://www.npr.org/features/feature.php?wfId=14
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.
we'll see microsoft leaked memos
that would be quite interesting, ya
Diebold might not hold up in court, but if this were M$, I wonder if the situation would be the same.....
http://www-personal.umich.edu/~jwagnerk/lists.tgz
That said, discovery won't prove anything one way or the other besides ownership of the documents. What this case will do is provide clear and unambiguous ammunition for Senate/Congressional inquiries, States Attorneys, etc. I bet Diebold can even be sued for making false statements (see Martha Stewart)
Three cheers for justice!
[Fuck Beta]
o0t!
"Live Free or Diebold."
You see? You see? Your stupid minds! Stupid! Stupid!
Scientology documents have marketable value; ie they were made available to high level members who pay money to achieve that high a level in the Scientology organisation. It is therefore possible to argue that the Scientology documents lose value as a tool to encourage members to progess within the organisation (and get access to thee documents) if made publicly available.
So there is a difference between these cases.
OK, I've been doing a little background reading, and my question is, how are internal memos copyrightable? Isn't a copyright supposed to be issued to a work for sale? Unless someone in the company is selling copies of the internal memos, how is it protected?
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
Remember the DirecTV extortion case? The people complaining about the extortion not only got slapped down by the court, the court made them pay DirecTVs legal costs to the tune of $100,000. Same thing will happen here.
The courts hate people challenging copyright.
I worked at a casino in Atlantic City for several years. One of my responsibilities was updating the code for our slot machine monitoring software--the portion that actually ran in the slot machines. When it was time to distribute an update I had to take the code up to the Director of Internal Audit on a floppy disk. He'd pop it into a computer in his office that would generate a 'diff' of sorts and print out two copies. They'd file one and I'd bring the other back. In the process the code would be compiled and uploaded to a shared folder on our AS/400--one that only he had the login and password to access. From there our slot server would download it (on a seperate token ring network) then distribute it to several headless boxes above the casino floor, which in turn would distribute it over RS-422 to the slot machine. That's just for the data collection code which ran on a completely separate processor card from the actual slot machine code.
The slot code that actually controlled the slot machines wouldn't even run until it was encrypted. When changes were made they'd have to be mailed to the NJ Division of Gaming Enforcement, who would have it audited, then compiled and encrypted. Then they'd send it back to us in encrypted format so we could upload it to the slot machines. This was basically their way of making sure the code was 'signed.'
This was over ten years so they might do it differently now. At any rate it made it fairly difficult to get code running on a casino floor slot machine without leaving a definate trail.
This isn't a democracy, it's a democratic republic. Unfortunately nobody seems to remember that anymore.
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. Send it your city councilmember, call your Congresscritter and your Senators, 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.
Despite the difficulties (and I have nothing monumental to say here), YES, YES, YES, YES, YES! I have to say thank you to the EFF, and those more actionably dedicated than I, for bringing this to a legal forum.
I think I'll stop here.
I prefer ye ole fashioned civil disobedience - at least until the concentration camps arrive.
The Bush Administration is taking a big fat nosedive just before the election. Fool me once, can't get fooled again may be the rallying cry of the 2004 Presidential Election. Clearly, there where shenannigans going on in the 2000 Election, which has only emboldened spreading this around for 2004.
For those convicted of felonies :(
Hopefully a first offender's pardon will let you cast a ballot next fall. At least until such laws can be repealed as the anti-democratic tools they are.
I'm no grammar expert, but I'd like to point out that some people miss 1 or 2 of the commas in the 2nd Amendment. From the Library of Congress version, there are 3 commas. "A well regulated militia, being necessary to the security of a free state, the right of the people to keep and bear arms, shall not be infringed." This sentence has 4 phrases. Not one of these phrases alone is a clause and cannot stand independently; no phrase has the proper subject-verb relationship to convey a complete thought. The phrase "being necessary to the security of a free state" is a present participle; it acts as an adjective modifying the noun "[a well regulated] militia." It contains neither the subject nor verb of the sentence. Taken together, "a well regulated militia, being necessary to the security of a free state," is an absolute phrase; absolute phrases do not modify any specific word in a sentence, but rather modify the entire sentence by providing context. "The right of the people to keep and bear arms" is the subject phrase of the sentence. The subject is "the right." "Of the people" and "to keep and bear arms" are prepositional phrases modifying "the right." "Shall not be infringed" is the verb phrase of the sentence. "Shall not be" is an auxiliary verb string modifying the main verb "infringed."
Therefore, the main idea conveyed by this sentence is "the right shall not be infringed."
ATM machines = Automatic Teller Machine machines.
Here is my mirror. Diebold DCMA claims are bogus.
-Seriv
I hope Diebold doesn't settle or withdraw their claims. Or if they do, then the EFF doesn't accept or withdraw their suit.
I hope the EFF take Diebold to court and subpoena them for all their worth. Get to the bottom of this. Establish a public record of just how incompetent or, more likely, corrupt these voting system companies can be. Call in expert witnesses. Depose the (largely Republican) executives. Find records of the communications Diebold has been having with election officials across the country, and why they haven't been doing their jobs. Shame them into getting a clue. Anything they can think of to establish the truth about how our democracy (?) is being run.
if the guy that made the machines was a partisan crook as long as the system was secure.
By secure I mean that system can't be cheated even if the people that run it have unlimited money and very good motivation.
Failing that, I'll accept a system that makes it very hard with severe penalties for even trying to cheat me out of my democracy. Life in FPMITA prison or death. It's that important.
Why do I have this? I don't smoke.
> Voting machines are just another example of an industry prime for careful regulation.
;-)
And in 20 years there will be a hue and cry to deregulate the voting industry
What's that old saying? "Open mouth, shoot self in foot." Something like that.
Diebold might win this case, but just the fact that it is being brought means that they have lost. All the facts will be aired and Diebold will lose the public trust. It's hard to imagine how a voting machine company could continue to operate under those circumstances.
But on to the case itself: According to the traditional four points courts consider in determing fair use, I'd say the EFF has a pretty reasonable case. (Though the DMCA will probably come into play and, as we all know, the DMCA can shred fair use rights entirely).
Here is my layman's analysis of the four points of Fair Use as they apply here:
1. "The nature of the copyrighted work"
As a long, factual type of work (as opposed to a work of artistic expression, something highly creative and original, or something like a short poem or song), these memos will enjoy the LEAST possible amount of protection of any kind of work, under this point. This point clearly weighs towards the students/ISPs.
2. "The purpose and character of the use, including whether such use is of a commercial nature or is for nonprofit educational purposes"
The character of the use is clearly non-commercial, which weighs heavily in favor of fair use. Especially since students and a university were involved, there could be some argument made about "nonprofit" and "educational purposes". Here, too, is where EFF can argue convincincly that it is in the public interest to have these important documents in full public view. Furthermore, extracts from or summaries of the documents would not serve the public interest in the same way that the full set of verbatim documents do.
3. "The amount and substantiality of the portion used in relation to the copyrighted work as a whole"
This is the only point that weighs heavily against the students/ISPs. Unfortunately, some judges will find in favor of the copyright holder if even ONE of the four points weighs in favor of the copyright holder.
4. "The effect of the use upon the potential market for or value of the copyrighted work." The market value of the literary copyright on this work is $0, and this weighs heavily in favor of the students/ISPs. Diebold never intended to sell these documents or make a profit from their copyright on these documents.
Entirely irrelevant is the fact that Diebold may lose money because of negative publicity or as a result of the revelation of embarrassing information in the copyrighted material. I believe that there is good precedent on this matter (though I'll have to leave it to the lawyers among you for the details).
The court is supposed to weigh all four factors together. Three of the four factors weigh towards the students/ISPs, which is certainly good. But I did happen to read a case not that long ago (not being a lawyer, I can't give the citation, sorry) in which the judge summed up very similar to they way I just did, found that 3 of the 4 points clearly favored Fair Use, and then ruled for the copyright holder. In his opinion, the fact that ALL of the work had been copied outweighed all the rest of the points. (I seem to recall that the case was actually rather similar to this one, and involved verbatim copying of "Church" of Scientology documents which proved various nefarious actions on the part of church members.)
Someone said that copyright doesn't apply until something is published. That isn't true (at least in the U.S.) and hasn't been for many years (since 1979?). Copyright in a work exists from the moment it is fixed in a tangible medium (ie, from the moment it is written, typed, recorded, videotaped, etc. etc.).
No copyright registration or copyright notice is required. However--the damages that can be collected are severely limited if the work was not registered with the copyright office BEFORE the violations occured.
The copyright for the Memos was certainly not registered when this whole t
N/T
"I like systems, their application excepted", George Sand (French)
That was the funniest thing I've read all day. Thank you!
They won't be to worried about the missed check when their backs are up against the wall!
autopr0n is like, down and stuff.
That was someone's oppinion, not any sort of scientific poll
autopr0n is like, down and stuff.
Where are you getting gun ownership data from? Iraq had much more liberal gun laws (as in, letting people have more access to guns) then the US, and they were not nearly as well enforced. Lots of people had pistols and even Kalishnakov assault rifles. Even today you see people who still have plenty of missiles and mortars and grenades and such.
I know the CPA has been trying to crack down on gun ownership, but I'd be surprised if there is less gun ownership there then here.
(so much for an armed populous preventing dictatorships as the NRA people seem to think)
autopr0n is like, down and stuff.
It might be a better idea to contact your state and county governments, who control those things now and make sure they know how you feel before the election.
autopr0n is like, down and stuff.
And when the monies are comingled (which they are), who's to say where the money came from?
I always read everything I sign and I know better than to take out student loans at 3% and invest them at 7% (wouldn't that be nice?). But if you were trying to be helpful -- I appreciate it.
James
I'm no grammar expert, but I'd like to point out that some people miss 1 or 2 of the commas in the 2nd Amendment. From the Library of Congress version, there are 3 commas. "A well regulated militia, being necessary to the security of a free state, the right of the people to keep and bear arms, shall not be infringed." This sentence has 4 phrases. Not one of these phrases alone is a clause and cannot stand independently; no phrase has the proper subject-verb relationship to convey a complete thought. The phrase "being necessary to the security of a free state" is a present participle; it acts as an adjective modifying the noun "[a well regulated] militia." It contains neither the subject nor verb of the sentence. Taken together, "a well regulated militia, being necessary to the security of a free state," is an absolute phrase; absolute phrases do not modify any specific word in a sentence, but rather modify the entire sentence by providing context. "The right of the people to keep and bear arms" is the subject phrase of the sentence. The subject is "the right." "Of the people" and "to keep and bear arms" are prepositional phrases modifying "the right." "Shall not be infringed" is the verb phrase of the sentence. "Shall not be" is an auxiliary verb string modifying the main verb "infringed."
Therefore, the main idea conveyed by this sentence is "the right shall not be infringed."
That is so clearly, concisely written that I cannot do the quote without doing the whole thing, all I can add is:
Hear! Hear! This was written back when people actually studied how the language worked, and those comma's are NOT mistakes, but inserted to make it damned clear to any wannabee tinpot dictators that this is how it works.
All these newbies that have no concept of how our chosen language is constructed, and therefore choose to interpret it in their own limited tunnel vision view of how things ought to be, often based on their own personal agenda, had best go back to school and actually STUDY the language.
Yes, I'm a firm believer in the 2nd amendment, in fact in all of them. The only thing I would change is the order of the list, because without the 2nd, we would not now have anything that even remotely resembles the 1st, which is vital to this conversation.
It would have been long since nibbled to death by those who could not stand to have their actions seen in the cold light of day.
I'm a bit like Mr. Heston, from my cold, dead, hands.
-
Cheers, Gene
A well regulated Militia being necessary to the security of a free State, the right of the people to keep and bear Arms shall not be infringed.
This is an English sentence that states two facts. One: A well regulated militia is necessary to the security of a free state, and Two: the right of the people to keep and bare arms shall not be infringed. There is a logical implication that people bearing arms will create a well regulated militia (in fact, it begs the question).
It doesn't matter what the subject of the sentence is, or how garbled or logically inconsistent it is. The constitution does not define reality (and cannot control the development of well regulated militias or our security) but what it does do is restrict the federal (and state) government actions. One action that they cannot take is to infringe the right of the the people to keep and bare arms.
If you disagree with it, see the other parts of the constitution that deal with changing it.
autopr0n is like, down and stuff.
Nice analysis. I prefer just to point out what a militia really is. The true definition of militia is anyone able to serve in the military.
Here is the exact US Law definition of a miltia:
Title 10 USC, Chapter 13, Section 311, part a
"The militia of the United States consists of all able-bodied males at least 17 years of age and, except as provided in section 313 of title 32, under 45 years of age who are, or who have made a declaration of intention to become, citizens of the United States and of female citizens of the United States who are members of the National Guard."
X(7): A program for managing terminal windows. See also screen(1).
That sentence is horribly written both logically and grammatically. Why not "The right of the people to keep and bear arms shall not be infringed"? Why have the extra crap at all. Four commas is not good, no matter how you slice it.
It's also logically inconsistent, it begs the question: "Will the people bearing arms lead to a well regulated militia".
The amendment should read "When people are allowed to arm themselves freely, a well regulated militia is formed. Because this is needed to secure a free state, the right of the people shall not be infringed."
Clearly we have the right to bear arms, however the constitution dictates government action, not reality. The begged question, "Will the people having the right to bear arms create a well regulated militia" is not necessarily true. Perhaps the framers didn't realize that.
Certainly, gun laws in Iraq where much more liberal* and less enforced then in the United states. People had assault rifles, mortars, RPGs, and Saddam didn't try to stop them. In fact he encouraged it (especially leading up the war). People who think gun ownership prevents dictatorships is living in a fantasy world.
If you're wondering, my position on the issue is basically "I don't give a fuck" followed by "I wish everyone who ever debated this issue wasn't so damn disingenuous". Maybe that's why I don't give a fuck. What's the point in choosing sides between a bunch of liars.
autopr0n is like, down and stuff.
Oh yeah, I forgot to mention, by "liberal" I mean the correct use of the word, not the useage of MORONS. (which is liberal = democrat/progressive)
autopr0n is like, down and stuff.
You don't actualy need to take away guns to have a dictatorship. People will fear you if they have a gun or not. Saddamn never did a damn thing about guns and his people never caused him any problems.
autopr0n is like, down and stuff.
Dunno if you were around, anyway it was eventualy ruled that laws cannot be copyrighted, and those works were copyrighted in error.
autopr0n is like, down and stuff.
Hi,
On my way to donate I noticed that they were a 501(c)3 non-profit organization. I thought that political groups were not allowed to be claimed as non-profit? Where exactly is the line drawn?
thanks
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.
Dude, linux-screws.com hasn't been loading for weeks. I hope it's because you found a real job and not because you couldn't pay your bill!
Hey, why not use this ability to submit Propositions for something good, and use them to outlaw closed source, paper trail-less, unaudtable voting machines like Diebold's here in Alameda County.
It would be good if this could get on the March primary ballot, so that there'd be time to ditch them before November, and for other states to realize that they should ditch them, too.
I did just realize, there's a huge conflict of interest with using Diebold voting machines to count votes on an anti-Diebold proposition. We'd have to conduct opinion and exit polls to make sure that the results of the election agreed with how people actually though, since Diebold has already shown that they can't be trusted, and often get the wrong results (always in favor of Republicans, it seems).
then Diebold would be suing for slander or libel, not copyright violation.
Diebold staff weren't the only contributors to the memos.
Fair use is very subjective. You can't claim absolutely that reporters can excerpt these memos because its entirely possible a judge is going to say that any excerpt of illegally obtained information exceeds fair use. I'm not a lawyer, but I've read enough of the U.S. Code to realize this isn't cut-and-dry, so perhaps you should stop leaping to conclusions?
Students sue Diebold?
What is this? Soviet Russia?
__ Someday, but not this morning, I'll finally learn to use the preview button.
NPR did about 10 minutes about the suit this afternoon on All Things Considered. They even had Wendy on. Also, a good overview about the problems with the machines. It appears the mainstream media is catching on to this. Shall we start a pool on when Faux News picks it up? (My guess is never!)
Mao won China with the gun, Gandhi won India its independence with the spinning wheel. Who do you think is the more respected worldwide?
Besides, sir, we shall not fight our battle alone. There is a just God who presides over the destinies of nations; and who will raise up friends to fight our battle for us. The battle, sir, is not to the strong alone; it is to the vigilant, the active, the brave... Is life so dear, or peace so sweet, as to be purchased at the price of chains and slavery? Forbid it Almighty God! I know not what course others may take; but as for me, give me liberty or give me death!"
Patrick Henry, March 23, 1775
damn fine..
~.~
I'm a peripheral visionary.
nothing to see here, move along
Or as the bumper sticker says: (mostly - I saw it a week ago on the back of an H2)
"So long as we have the second ammendment we will always have the first"
Has anyone else seen a phrase like this and laughed, not at it's content but it's logic.
I mean to have a second ammendment you must have a first ammendment, regardless of the content of either.
--- As to make my comment seem, by comparison, more intelegent... doodie doodie doodie poop poop poop!
One has to admit though, that it made you think.
.
Yes, the two are mutually reinforcing. Many thanks to the framers. But I think the logic is there, that because we have the 2nd, we still have the first. Once we've lost the first, we are lost.
--
Cheers, Gene
For the United States? Think bigger than that - it could well be important for the world as a whole. Bear in mind that your government gets to choose which evil states to bomb each year. I think it's fairly clear that the bloodthirsty megolamaniacs in Washington need to be democratically elected, or someone might complain.
My town, little old Dayton, Indiana, with only about 200 voters, uses Diebold voting machines, as mandated by the county. In this morning's election, the machines would not allow voters to cast multiple votes in a category (for city council, I believe).
So, the opening of elections is currently being postponed while we print punch-card ballots. As of now, I think the voting is 1.5 hours late.
We trusted Diebold voting machines, and we had no backup plan. Someone is going to hear about this. I guess Diebold machines are not only insecure, they are also unreliable!
Ceci n'est pas une pipe.
If they hadn't been made freely available, someone could have made a fortune leaking them to the press!
All these newbies that have no concept of how our chosen language is constructed... had best go back to school and actually STUDY the language.
Um, not to be THAT guy, but the plural of "comma" is "commas" and not "comma's." I couldn't resist the urge to deflate your little grammar tyranny platform.
"Who do you think is the more respected worldwide?"
How can anyone respect Ghandi... the guy wore diapers, had weird attitudes about pretty much everygthing and only "won" because he was fighting a "civilized" opponent.
Now, Mao was ruthless, but he did bring China into the 20th century for better or worse. He was a loon, but he actually accomplished something.
No, I think anyone who has something more than feathers for brains will admit that Mao is someone who will actually be remembered 200 years from now. Ghandi will primarily be known for having a US postage stamp with his picture on it.
This e-mail may serve as your receipt for your tax deductible donation to the Electronic Frontier Foundation (EFF).
On 11/3/2003 8:41:44 PM you pledged a one-time donation of $25 to the Electronic Frontier Foundation.
To fight these fights on any practical level, they've just got to have the ol' cashish. Have you contributed?
09 F9 11 02 9D 74 E3 5B D8 41 56 C5 63 56 88 C0
Chuckle... That seems to be one of my hangups, the miss-use of the '
:-)
And no, I never claimed to be to pass that 8th grade final exam from Salinas KS from about 190x that you can find links to all over the web.
That ones a cast iron bitch, and those who passed that test have much repsect from this old fart. Sadly, I expect most of that class has passed on.
Besides, thats just a wee bit, say about 30 years, before I was born. But, in school all those years ago, thru the 40's, I did get the benefit of the last few years of teaching phonics, so I cheerfully out read even those only 10 years behind me both for speed and comprehension. They taught me something else too, that reading is fun!
I can cheerfully read everything that counts out of the daily paper over a sausage and egg and hash browns breakfast at Mac's Steak House, aka McDonalds. That includes scanning the want adds for a good deal on a motorcycle, something I told myself that I was getting too old & slow to ride anymore about 4 years back. But I keep looking anyway
--
Cheers, Gene
More like the Brown & Williamson tobacco papers. In May 1994, someone (probably a B&W paralegal) photocopied 4000 pages of internal documents and anonymously mailed them to Shelton Glantz, a professor of medicine at the University of California at San Francisco, with the return address "Mr. Butts."
Glantz put the papers in the university library, where they were available to researchers. B&W sued for the return of the papers on the ground that the papers were protected by attorney-client privilege, but the California Supreme Court ruled in June 1995 that the university had first-amendment rights to make the papers available to the public, so they scanned them and published on the web.
The legal reasoning was that "there is ... a very strong public interest in permitting this particular information, judging from what has been shown in the papers, as to what it concerns, permitting this information to remain available for use by the university or by others who may obtain it from the university."
On my way to donate I noticed that they were a 501(c)3 non-profit organization. I thought that political groups were not allowed to be claimed as non-profit? Where exactly is the line drawn?
Endorsing candidates, or a political party, is a good rubric. The EFF does neither. Although the EFF might currently (and historically, AFAIK) be facing the most opposition from the Republican party and the positions taken by its members, that does not mean that the EFF therefore endorses the Democratic party, or any candidate of it.
>>Protesters at Bush events are put into "Free Speech Zones" far from the actual event.
Let's be fair here -- it's not just Bush.
Patricia Mendoza was jailed for shouting "You suck, and those boys died!" at President Clinton at a Chicago festival on July 2, 1996. (She was angry about the lack of American response to the bombing death of 19 American soldiers in Saudi Arabia.) In the opinion of the Secret Service, saying "you suck" amounts to threatening the President, a Federal crime, so she was jailed and interrogated for 12 hours.
In 1993, William Kelly challenged President Clinton about his unfulfilled promise for a middle-class tax cut. He was booed out of the meeting, and armed agents showed up at his home later that night and hauled him off to jail in leg irons and cuffs.
And it's not just the office of the President that doesn't like to be challenged. Consider Berkley, California's HUD (Housing and Urban Development) department -- it sued those who spoke out about a planned homeless shelter in their neighborhood.
Contempt for the "commoners" is not limited to just one political party or even the office of the President; it's widespread.
Most of the general public has never heard of them.
I think it's just beginning to percolate into the news -- for example here
If you want to cause trouble for them, just demand a recount. When it is found to be impossible, people will notice.
SELECT count(*) FROM votes WHERE candidate = 'Joe Politician';
86,905
Want a recount? Okay, sure, here you go:
SELECT count(*) FROM votes WHERE candidate = 'Joe Politician';
86,905
I'm not kidding. And while i feel bad about recommending that we increease the amount of blank-minded email forwarding out there...and don't really know that it's a good idea... Think about the junk that DOES get forwarded. The best reason i can think of to do this is that it would wake up some sleeping people. The best reason NOT to is that it requires trusting those sme sleeping idiots with actual information to pass on, and hoping that they don't get creative somewhere along the way. So what follows could well be the world's worst idea:
Take the memos. Put them in an email- as text, not as attachments, or a a link to one of the sites hosting them.
Tell the recipient what the issue is, and why it matters.
Tell the recipient to tell their friends and get informed about this. Tell them about the EFF. Use the name Diebold and mention that they make ATMs, but aren't keeping the voting machines up to a verifiable standard.
Tell them to talk to their friends about it.
Send memo.
Four weeks later, there will be millions of Americans wondering when Bill Gates will send them a check that they can donate to gove the little boy with cancer a new kidney to replace the one that got stolen.
And hundreds of thousands, at least, will be asking out loud about Diebold and voting machines. Information can spread as fast as misinformation, But it unfortunately would have to use the same channels. And is likely to lose a lot in translation- but before it changes beyong recognition, a lot of people could learn things that they really ought to know about.
"I'd say 'Have a good time,' but arson is still illegal.
Holy Filing Cabinet, Batman! The link to the "controversial internal memos" was a good thing to do, but by gosh, I tried to find anything worhwhile and came up empty. THERE ARE THOUSANDS OF EMAILS, with the only "organization" being that they are grouped by date. Lots of scathing memos about "server maintenance" and other such crap. Thanks for nothing...
pot.kettle(black);
I'm curious about that. Registering the copyright would essentially amount to a signed confession that the memos are authentic, which could be used as evidence against them. So I'm wondering if they actually did register it.
I also saw a guy with a NRA sticker and a "Boycott Canada, France & Germany"
I will defend to the death his right to saw it but it doesn't make him nay less of a dumb fuck for thinking that we could loose three of our largest trading partners becasue they think GWB is full of shit.
So I will say as long as we have Americans's we will have knee jerk jackoffs who say things that make no sense and rile up more dumbasses to make the world a dumer more hateful place.
I think this definition is dependant on the draft, but the draft is gone. Long live the draft. Back to my main point... if you don't belong to a milita then you have in no small way abdicated your right to bear arms.