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."
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
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.
IANAL
Copyright only applies to published works. Memos aren't published so they aren't copyrighted.
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
I stole this Sig
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
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
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?
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
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.
Actually, the government as an entity isn't legally capable of holding a copyright - works produced by it are, by definition, in the public domain. You'd think this would mean that legal documents are public domain, too, which they are - except that they hire specific companies to transcribe them into usable form, and said companies hold the copyright on the LINE NUMBERING of the resultant documents. Spit.
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.
According to John Adams, Thomas Jefferson, etc. the 2nd amendment (right to keep and bear arms) existed to keep gov't in check so a revolution wouldn't be necesary, but would be possible.
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 thought of a line I once read in ones of Kim Stanley Robinson's Mar's trilogy books (can't remember if he got it from somewhere else), this might not be the exact quote but
"The only thing that governments fear is people in the streets"
Even the worst dictatorship relies on support from the people, if that choose not to obey then there is nothing a government can do.
I stole this Sig
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
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 claimed a copyright to the laws themselves and claimed that his website was hurting their business. As I recall he backed down -- he probably could have challenged it, but who wants to spend the money on a lawyer?
In any case, WTF is wrong with that picture? My state (NY) posts all of the state laws (Penal, DMV, Liquor, etc etc) on the State Assembly webpage. Shouldn't this be a model for everybody?
I want peace on earth and goodwill toward man.
We are the United States Government! We don't do that sort of thing.
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 colonists. In Iraq, you have a powerful army of "peacekeepers", in effect, attempting to fight a decentralized, but very motivated group of, well... nuts. They have the arsenal that the Iraqis abandoned when the government fled the incoming American forces. I don't know too many (read: any) Americans that have SAMs in their basements...
A sustained guerilla campaign against a military as powerful as ours is effective if you own the terrain (Iraq) and are playing defense, but it's a lousy way to try and take over a country. The only place that really works is places like central Africa where you have nearly non-existant governments that can literally be overthrown days after they take power. The problem is, the government doesn't really need bombing runs to overwhelm resistance pockets. And, if the inside groups scatter too broadly, they'll be almost totally uncoordinated across a relatively large country. It just wouldn't work out very well.
Besides... it's a lot easier just to vote sleazeballs out of office (for the time being...) than to violently overthrow them. Hell... if I get to the elections next year (I hate the current administration so much that I've been motivated to vote for the first time) and find Diebold's machines there, I'll throw a fit right in front of everybody at the polling place and let them all know just what Diebold's doing. Yelling at the top of your lungs in public may make you look like an idiot, but it's a good way to at least get people to sit up and take notice about bad things going on. Another good alternative to violent revolution!
Alito: A vote for Alito is a punch in the eye to put that bitch back in her place!
As one guy who was arrested for refusing to move to one of those zones put it, "I thought the whole country was a free speech zone."
Don't blame me; I'm never given mod points.
Not quite that blatant. The Uniform Building Code is written and published by a private organization. Local governments will sometimes (usually) adopt the UBC "by reference," which essentially means passing an ordinance saying that the UBC published in such and so year shall have the force of law within that city.
They do so without including the UBC's text, however. My own city did that for our traffic law, passing an ordinance stating that the Colorado Model Traffic Code is adopted by reference, with homegrown penalty provisions. (For you Coloradans, it's Article Four of Title 42 of the Colorado Revised Statutes, less licensing/registration/insurance provisions and DUI. Since the MTC comes from the legislature anyway, it doesn't really matter.)
So, the publisher still owns the UBC. It's just being used by a local government. Or so the story goes.
It's also been tried here with one particular form of statute book. I have three current ones on my shelf: the Colorado Peace Officer's Handbook, the Colorado Peace Officer's Legal Sourcebook, and the Colorado Revised Statutes Pertaining to Criminal Law. Three separate compilations from three separate publishers: one for-profit and two not-for-profit. The value-added features are copyright, such that I (hypothetically: they're culled word-for-word from the standard jury instructions) can't re-sell copies of the Handbook's misdemeanor charging section.
The actual text of a given law, however, is not copyright. But then, the legislature did not adopt CRS 18-3-206 "Menacing" by reference to a private publication, but instead wrote it themselves.
And either this clarified things or confused the hell out of you. Law stuff can do both at once.
Copyright won't be any defense if you're prosecuted for an act of treason. After all, that's what we're suggesting the stakes are here.
It won't matter if these memos are copyright by their respective authors, if they amount to a trail of evidence that can convict them of federal crimes.
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.
" 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.
"
Actually it sounds to me as if the Chinese government was very afraid, why else massacre the marchers? Unfortunately I don't have the information to know if those peoples deaths led to the chinese government trying to improve the situation so the same thing wouldn't happen again, or if fact if it caused them to tighten their grip so the same thing wouldn't happen again. One thing I do know is that the chinese government was truly afraid and I suspect they were extremely fortunate that they didn't lose power. You can fight a person, you can fight a group of people, you can even fight a large march as the chinese government showed, but what happens when you have to fight an entire city or even a nation? I strongly suspect if the protest had spread just a little more widely then China would be a very different place today. No the Chinese government was definately afraid.
I agree that they were afraid, but as far as improving things, I would say they made things even worse. First they hunted down all those dissidents, even when they fled to Hong Kong. China getting Hong Kong back helped a lot. They made sure everyone knew that they had been put into prison at hard labour.
They also made sure that it was understood that the US would do nothing to help them. Bush Sr gave China Most Favoured Nation status as a reward for the Tienanmen Square massacre. Clinton, who campaigned on the premise that he would reverse that and be tougher on China accepted milions of dollars from the Chinese government, continued Bush Sr's program of giving China military technology, and went on a speaking tour in China in which it was publicly announced that he had been ordered by Beijing that he not say the word freedom or speak of it. To celebrate Clinton's coming the Beijing government executed four dissidents and made hay of the fact Clinton said nothing against it. It should also be noted that many of these dissidents tried to come to the US and were denied visas.
The students in Tienanmen square only wanted minor reform to the existing government. They were not even asking for real freedom or democracy, and they got mowed down and then hunted to extinction. If anything, especially because of collusion from sympathetic "leaders" in the US who agree with their ideology and methods, the Beijing government is more powerful today than before.