Slashdot Mirror
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."
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.
Support more choices in goverment-Vote 3rd party.
We need to make an example out of Diebold to show other companies like them that we won't just lie down and accept their incompetence and deception. I've written both my senators on this and directed them to www.blackboxvoting.org. I would encourage all the other Americans on /. (and foreigners... what the hell, can't hurt) to do the same. If left unchecked, Diebold represents a serious threat to the democratic process.
Erm... This isn't a chink in the DMCA. It's an exception written into the law to prevent abuse of the the legislation.
Unusually for a DMCA story, this part of the law is being used in exactly the way it was intended.
I violate the DMCA; jail, Jail, JAIL!
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!
I find it strange how there seem to be tides with regard to law, particulalry in the States. It seemed that a few months ago, Slashdot was full of stories (so many, I can't be bothered to find and link them all) about this or that abude (PATRIOT, Patent Law, Copyright abuse, Trademark disputes, INDUCE, CAN-SPAM oh gods does it stop?), but now we seem to be seeing the downswing (or up if you prefer), where certain parts of laws or acts are finally being shown to be useless or unlawful or just plain dumb.
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
Natsu gusa-ya, Tsuwamono domo-ga, Yume no ato
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.
This is an incredibly important precedent which has been set here, and the defendants have got off lightly because no damages were sought.
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.
The last scintilla of doubt just rode out of town
It's not only the large groups that people need to worry about, but now there's so much litigation around copyrights, some ISPs fear anyone.
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.