Advertisement
Promo

Compliance Toolkit

E-voting company faces congressional inquiry

Paul Festa CNET News

Published: 02 Dec 2003 12:10 GMT

  • Email
  • Trackback
  • Clip Link
  • Print friendly
  • Post Comment

Diebold is facing threats on two fronts as free-speech advocates pursue monetary damages against it and a presidential candidate urges a congressional inquiry into the company.

Diebold, which makes touch-screen voting machines in use around the world, on Monday reiterated its withdrawal of copyright takedown notices directed at numerous Internet service providers with subscribers who posted copies of its internal email correspondence -- and in some cases links to those copies.

Those takedown notices, issued under a provision of the Digital Millennium Copyright Act (DMCA), earned Diebold a lawsuit by an ISP with a client who linked to the documents and by two Swarthmore students whose school -- acting as their ISP -- had removed copies under takedown threat.

The DMCA takedown provision is designed to let copyright holders warn ISPs of copyright violations and ask that they be taken down before filing suit against them. Free-speech advocates argued that Diebold's notices had less to do with copyright protection than with damage control.

The internal Diebold email correspondence in question criticised the company's software, security, certification and sales practices.

Diebold indicated in a 24 November filing with the US District Court in San Jose, California, that it would retract the DMCA notices and would not sue those who posted the email correspondence or their ISPs. On Monday, the company restated that promise in the courtroom.

But lawyers who represent the Online Policy Group, an ISP whose client Indymedia had linked to the Diebold emails without posting them, indicated that they had not finished pressing their case against Diebold.

Instead, they pledged to seek a court order spelling out that publishing or linking to the Diebold emails doesn't amount to copyright infringement, as well as monetary damages under the DMCA on grounds of misrepresentation.

"It's a tremendous victory for free speech, for the Internet as a communications forum, and it's reaffirming the public side of the balance that copyright is supposed to embody," Wendy Seltzer, an attorney with the Electronic Frontier Foundation (EFF), said in an interview after Monday's hearing.

Seltzer, who represented the Swarthmore students, said the plaintiffs would seek monetary damages to dissuade companies from using DMCA takedown notices lightly.

"We've been saying from the beginning that Diebold shouldn't be able to use copyright law to stop discussion of technologies that are at the heart of our democracy, and Diebold has finally acknowledged that by dropping its threats of suit," Seltzer said. "And we plan to drive that point home to Diebold and anyone else who might be tempted to misuse copyright similarly."

Diebold did not return calls seeking comment.

Diebold's retreat in the courtroom comes as US congressional representative Dennis Kucinich, who is seeking the Democratic Party's presidential nomination, jumped onto the anti-Diebold bandwagon by providing links to the Diebold email correspondence from his House of Representatives Web site.

The Web site, launched on 20 November, criticises Diebold for both its product and its conduct in pursuing the Swarthmore students.

"Diebold has been using coercive legal claims to intimidate Internet service providers and even universities to shut down Web sites with links to its memos and remove the memo content," the site reads. "By abusing the Digital Millennium Copyright Act, Diebold has intimidated numerous Internet service providers to comply with its requests...Congressman Kucinich is working to address these problems by providing some of Diebold's internal memos on this site to increase public access..."

Kucinich also asked the US House Judiciary Committee to investigate Diebold's DMCA takedown notices.

"Diebold's actions are representative of a growing body of abuses through which large and powerful parties unfairly intimidate ISPs to remove information those parties do not like," Kucinich wrote in a letter dated 21 November. "Powerful parties should not be permitted to misuse copyright as a tool for limiting bad press and barring access to legitimate consumer information."

The court hearing the students' and ISP's case against Diebold sent the case for mediation, scheduled hearings for motions in January, and scheduled a final hearing for 9 February.

  • Email
  • Trackback
  • Clip Link
  • Print friendlyPrint with EPSON

Did you find this article useful?
88 out of 155 people found this useful


Full Talkback thread

0 comments


Company/Topic Alerts

Create a new alert from the list below:






Video icon

Video

Cloud Watch Special Report

Five cloud computing myths exploded

Five cloud computing myths exploded

Analysis The cloud is providing a fertile habitat for the marketeers and their exaggerated claims. We examine the hokum and debunk the five most frequently peddled misconceptions about the cloud

More Special Reports

Sentry Posts Blog

Campaigners criticise '£10bn NHS IT ov...

The National Health Service's flagship IT project has been criticised by a tax campaign group for running billions of pounds over budget. The NHS National Programme for IT (NPfIT)... More

1 comment

Climate research centre compromised

One of the UK's leading climate change research centres has had a security breach. The Climate Research Unit at the University of East Anglia (UEA) suffered a compromise of information,... More

1 comment

Government web-monitoring plans on hol...

Government plans to compel ISPs to process and store details of all web communications have been put on hold until after the next election. The Home Office told ZDNet UK on Wednesday... More

1 comment


Skip Sub Navigation Links to CNET Brand Links

Help

Become part of the ZDNet community.

Newsletters