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."
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.
... 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.
I disagree. Most of the general public has never heard of them.
Here's why the fair use argument will hold up in court:
- 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.
--
the sewers belch me up.. the heavens spit me out... from ethers tragic I am born again... and now i'm with you now
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.
Most of the public has seen their names on ATM machines. While they might not know much about the company, they know they give them cash, and that's good enough for many a joe consumer.
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.
Um, the only thing *civilized* governments fear is people in the streets (not a correction to the quote, a correction to the idea). Take China, for instance. People marched in the street, and even stood up to tanks. Then they got mowed down by machine gun fire and were run over by the tanks.
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.
God invented whiskey so the Irish would not rule the world.
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
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.