Diebold Rejected in Copyright Takedown Attempt

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."

Comments

So, when's the perjury trial?

[acceleriter]

The takedown notices were sent under penalty of perjury, right? And there isn't even the wiggle room of the perjury clause only pertaining to the statement that the sender is an agent of the copyright holder, since the documents weren't covered by copyright.

Bet they're well enough connected that none of them will be prosecuted for it, though.

Re:So, when's the perjury trial?

[Anonymous Coward]

Last year one of my customers was threathened by a representant of SABAM, the local RIAA equivalent.

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.

Sweet

[Anonymous Coward]

One more chink in the DMCA's armor!

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.

Copywrite Infringement

[Tyndmyr]

Im fairly happy to see this, and not just because of my dislike of diebolds massive security issues with the voting machines.

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.

Just the fact that....

[GillBates0]

companies can go as far as sending frivolous C&D's and threatening action (if no response is received within "24 hours" as in this case) tells me something is screwed up about the system.

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.

My Obligatory Diebold Link:

[ImaLamer]

Example of Diebold at it's best

So what is the punishement?

[Yaa 101]

I wanna see punishment... When personal sombody makes even a mistake they are punished from here to tokyo. I want to see the same with a arrogant company that rapes laws.

Is it just me...

[scovetta]

or has the last few weeks had quite a few "Your Rights Online" articles that were actually good for the people?

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.

the press..?

[soloes]

I dont know if it will help, but maybe if enough of us flod the major news agencies with the Demonstration at http://www.equalccw.com/dieboldtestnotes.html#step bystep
maybe they will give in and run this. So here are some contacts:
Nightly@NBC.com
http://www.abcnews.go. com/sections/wnt/WorldNewsTo night/WNT_newemail_form.html
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.

Summary misses the most important part

[swillden]

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.

Killed two birds with one stone...

[KD5YPT]

the court did. (Sorry for the Yoda reference... but can't resist it when type the Subject).

Here's how.

1. Rule against Diebold, now all knows truth.
2. Rule the DMCA is being abused, that's one ruling AGAINST DMCA.