Judge rules e-voting vendor misrepresented law

Oct. 01, 2004

SAN JOSE, Calif. (AP) - A manufacturer of electronic voting equipment knowingly misrepresented its claims when it sent threatening letters to the Internet providers of people who had posted the company's internal documents online, a federal judge has ruled.

Diebold Inc.'s letters claimed the leaked documents violated its copyrights under the Digital Millenium Copyright Act and demanded that they be removed immediately. But the same law bars making threats when the copyright holder knows no infringement occurred.

On Thursday, U.S. District Judge Jeremy Fogel issued a summary judgment in favor two Swarthmore college students, who posted the material, and their Internet provider Online Privacy Group, which declined to comply with Diebold's demands.

They sued Diebold in November 2003, seeking $5,185.50 in damages and attorneys' fees. Fogel will determine the amount of damages to be awarded at a later time.

"This decision is a victory for free speech and for transparency in discussions of electronic voting technology," said Wendy Seltzer, an Electronic Frontiers Foundation attorney who represented OPG in the case.

Read More >>

Electronic Frontier Foundation >>