ISP Rejects Diebold Copyright Claims Against News Website

http://www.eff.org/Legal/ISP_liability/20031016_eff_pr.php

EFF Defends Right to Publish Links to Electronic Voting Memos
Electronic Frontier Foundation Media Release

San Francisco - Defending the right to link to controversial information about flaws in electronic voting systems, EFF announced today it will defend an Internet Service Provider (ISP) and a news website publisher against claims of indirect copyright infringement from the electronic voting machines' manufacturer.

On October 10, 2003, electronic voting company Diebold, Inc., sent a cease-and-desist letter to the nonprofit Online Policy Group (OPG) ISP demanding that OPG remove a page of links published on an Independent Media Center (IndyMedia) website located on a computer server hosted by OPG.

Diebold sent out dozens of similar notices to ISPs hosting IndyMedia and other websites linking to or publishing copies of Diebold internal memos. OPG is the only ISP so far to resist the takedown demand from Diebold.

"What topic could be more important to our democracy than discussions about the mechanics and legitimacy of electronic voting systems now being introduced nationwide?" said EFF Staff Attorney Wendy Seltzer. "EFF won't stand by as corporations like Diebold chill important online debate by churning out legal notices to ISPs that usually just take down legitimate content rather than face the legal risk."


I am so glad that someone is standing up to these bums in regards to these cease and desist letters. Cease and desist letters are not court orders. The sender does not have to prove the legal merit of their claims to send these things to people, you just need enough money to pay the lawyers to send them. Most of the time the people who get them are intimidated and willingly comply. However, in Diebold's case, until they get a judge to issue a court order there is really no reason to even respond to such harassment because that is all it is.

:party: :bounce: :hi:

Diebold has more resources to hire a team of lawyers than Bev Harris and a lot of others involved with the BBV website do. That scared more than a few people and ISP's given the fact that the DCMA Act was quoted.

Given that, Diebold's CEO has publicly announced he'll will do everything in his power to hand Dimbo the next election, Diebold's refusal to incorporate the most rudimentary safeguards of the election process in their equipment and procedures and Diebold's claim that links to their electronic memos on the web were copywrighted.

I think the EFF and BBV have a valid legal case that will be brought up on the World-Wide Web and argued just before the 2004 election takes place.

If not and SCOTUS intervenes, I think it will be the beginning of a Civil War in the US with nobody winning.

is intended to do, it is meant to intimidate people. However, it was not Bev & Co who were intimidated by these thugs it was their ISP. I am glad that there is finally an ISP who is willing to stand up to them and call their bluff. In regards to Bev & Co., in my book they are national heros and hopefully will be honored has such some day.

Jim March (an outspoke BBV activist) and myself think that the whole Diebold tactic is a bluff.

The last thing Diebold wants is for these emails to be entered into evidence in a courtroom, where they would come under the scrutiny of a judge and possibly prosecutors.

EFF has enough resources to fight Diebold's "take down" notice. Diebold's next step would be to sue for copyright infringement, which means the emails must be examined to determine if the use they were put to violated copyright law.

Two major factors will be argued if they do:

1) Compelling public interest.

2) You can't use copyright law to shield a crime (fraud).

I do not think Diebold wants it to go that far.

David Allen
Publisher, CEO, Janitor
Plan Nine Publishing
http://www.plan9.org

I own a graphics arts company and deal with copyright issues all the time. I have on occassion had my copyright lawyer send out cease and desist letters, knowing full well that if the person who is ripping off my images wants to continue to do so, that it was not likely if the case ever went to court, that I would even be able to win. Under the circumstance with the BBV issues, Diebold would be foolish to try to make a federal case out of it. A lot of their dirty laundry will get aired in the process if they do.

:kick:

:kick: