EFF Defends Your Right to Vote on Election Day 2006

Deeplink by Matt Zimmerman

Hoping for a quiet, orderly election day? Dream on. In recent days -- a full week before most Americans go to the polls -- election observers have already reported problems with electronic voting machines:

• Selections made on Diebold touchscreen voting machines in Florida have registered for the wrong candidate, evoking widespread reports of similar problems in 2004.

• Hart Intercivic voting machines in Virginia are truncating the names of several candidates on the summary page, including the name of Democratic candidate for the U.S. Senate James H. "Jim" Webb, whose name appears as "James H. 'Jim.'"

This year's election will feature hot races for no fewer than sixty House and a dozen Senate seats, along with a slew of contested state and local races. With many races likely to come down to the wire, election irregularities could lead to disaster.

Along with our partners in the Election Protection Coalition and numerous volunteers, EFF will once again be on the front lines to ensure that voters' ballots are counted as cast. We will help solve technology-related problems at the polls, document voting machine-related incidents for future examination, and bring any legal action that might be required by equipment failures.

EFF today released Electronic Voting Machine Information Sheets that give election observers (and the general public) a quick glimpse into how today's voting equipment works as well as the types of problems that have been reported about these systems in the past. EFF is also investigating reports of voting equipment irregularities and discussing them with on-the-ground observers as well as election officials. Finally, in case something does indeed go wrong next Tuesday, EFF and its partners are preparing legal pleadings that will allow us to go to court to keep polls open, to halt the use of malfunctioning equipment, or stop illegal or erroneous practices by election officials.

If you encounter any type of problems on election day, call the Election Protection Hotline at (866) OUR-VOTE. With your help, we'll be able to help protect voters in the short term as well as continue to improve the accuracy, integrity, and transparency of voting technology over the long term.

[Permalink]

Is the DMCA Coming Down Under? New Copyright Bill on Fast-Track in Australia

Deeplink by Gwen Hinze

As a result of a Free Trade Agreement between Australia and the U.S. that came into force in 2005, Australia is required to rewrite its current, relatively flexible, technological protection measure law by 1 January 2007, to make it more like the DMCA. A serious policy debate on how to frame a DRM law that does the least damage to consumers, scientific research, technological innovation and competition has been underway in Australia for several years. In February, a landmark Australian parliamentary committee report with consumer and technology-friendly recommendations for Australia's rewrite process also pointed the way for other countries seeking a sensible response to the U.S. effort to export its unbalanced DMCA regime through recent free trade agreements. But many of the insights from that policy debate could be lost if the 219 page Copyright Amendment Bill, currently being fast-tracked through Australia's Parliament, is passed. Apart from rewriting Australia's current TPM law, the Bill would also make a number of sweeping changes to Australian copyright law, including introducing new criminal penalties.

After the jump we explain what's in the Bill and what concerned Australians can do.

UPDATE:

Submissions to the Australian Senate Committee tasked with reviewing the Bill have now been published. There are over 50 submissions posted. Here are some great submissions we've read and recommend: Dale Clapperton and Prof. Stephen Corones from QUT's great submission on TPMs and interoperability and competition issues, Prof. Brian Fitzgerald and QUT team's submission on proposed criminal provisions, and Kim Weatherall's submission on the deficiencies in the proposed format shifting exception (i.e. it won't cover iPods in particular, and MP3 players used outside of the home) and other issues raised by the Bill; and Electronic Frontiers Australia on TPM and fair dealing issues.

[Read the entire post]

DMCA Subpoenas Should Not Be Abused to Silence Speech

Deeplink by Kurt Opsahl

The much maligned Digital Millennium Copyright Act (DMCA) allows a copyright holders to unmask an Internet user's identity based on a mere allegation of infringement without filing an actual lawsuit or providing the user any due process. DMCA 512(h) is troubling enough when used in cases of actual infringement, but even more troubling when used to stifle critical speech -- and far worse when the content at issue is about the subpoena-seekers, not by them.

Today, EFF announced that it is fighting back against Landmark Education's attempts to abuse DMCA subpoenas to Google Video, YouTube and the Internet Archive to identify people who posted a video documentary critical of the organization.

The French documentary, entitled Voyage Au Pays Des Nouveaux Gourous (Voyage to the Land of the New Gurus), is not copyrighted by Landmark, but it does contain hidden camera footage from inside the Landmark Forum. To the extent that Landmark has any copyright at all at issue, such limited and transformative use of a copyrighted work for purpose of criticism, commentary, and news reporting is self-evidently fair use. While Landmark may believe that the documentary is unfair (as asserted in its letters), the DMCA is not an appropriate way to identify critics.

Landmark's efforts are being challenged on multiple fronts. The Internet Archive is fighting its subpoena, and EFF filed official objections on its behalf. EFF will also file a motion to quash the subpoena issued to Google Video, on behalf of the anonymous speaker who uploaded the video. Google has advised Landmark that it will not produce the requested information pending a ruling on that motion. YouTube sent notification to the user about its subpoena, and is giving the user a reasonable opportunity to move to quash it.

The video is also available on the French video site, Daily Motion. It is unclear whether Landmark has sought identity information from Daily Motion.

You might recall that EFF helped Verizon successfully limit the scope of DMCA 512(h) when the RIAA attempted to attain the identities of P2P file sharing users. The D.C. Circuit Court of Appeals held that the provision doesn't apply to content residing on individuals' own computers. But 512(h) still does apply to content on an online service provider's computer. Landmark Forum's actions provide even more reasons why substantive reform of this provision is necessary.

More information about the Landmark Forum misuse of the DMCA here

[Permalink]

Stats Expert: Paperless Voting Spells Disaster in Election 06

Deeplink by Derek Slater

Statisticians are trained experts in data collection, so it's worth paying special attention to the American Statistical Association President's timely letter [PDF] about accurately counting votes in the upcoming national election. President Sallie Keller-McNulty warns that, "[W]e can expect between five to twenty federal elections and dozens of local elections to be ... too close to call." "To resolve close elections" and make sure every vote is accurately counted, election officials must be ready to do "real recounts (cross-checking paper records against official tabulations), not just rereading machine totals" and perform "random audits in all localities."

We couldn't have said it better ourselves. Tragically, millions of votes will be cast on e-voting machines that lack voter verified paper records, and of those that will be, even fewer will use those records during recounts or audits. As the letter points out, and as has long been made painfully obvious in previous elections, merely rereading machine totals is not a "real recount."

The American Statistical Association has offered to provide more information on improving the process of elections. We hope that election officials across the country (as well as legislators) will take them up on the offer.

Learn more about how EFF is fighting to protect your right to vote.

[Permalink]

EFF Releases FAQ to Help Bloggers Investigate the Government

Deeplink by Marcia Hofmann

EFF has updated the Legal Guide for Bloggers to include a new section on the Freedom of Information Act (FOIA), the federal open government law. The FAQ explains how bloggers can use the FOIA to ask for government records, get processing fees waived, and what to do if an agency denies a request. It also shows online journalists how to take advantage of the FOIA's special treatment for news media requesters.

For more information about EFF's FOIA work, check out the FLAG Project.

Learn what you can do to support bloggers' rights here.

[Permalink]

miniLinks for 2006-10-25

miniLinks by Danny O'Brien

• Free Speech Pays
  The Knight Foundation is dispensing $5 million to cyberjournalism projects
  
• Data-Mine Californian Politicians
  Monitor campaign contributions to Californian politicos.
  
• Squeezebox Picked Up by Logitech
  EFF-supporter Slim Devices remotely transferred to the PC peripheral giant.
  
• Internet Governance Forum in Athens: Free Speech
  Sponsored by EFF and many others.
  
• Fortune Profiles DVD Jon
  Interoperability or bust.
  
• Microsoft Privacy Practice Document
  But does it practice what it preaches?
  
• Meet the Censors
  Masters of the Great Firewall.
  
• Shut it up With Tinfoil
  Wallets that could help prevent your RFID-embedded cards from leaking private info.
• Spyware-Assisted In-Game Advertising
  For a better gaming experience.
• An Electronic Voting Machine Wishlist
  Step one: not Diebold.
• Malware King-of-the-Hill
  A spam-sending trojan purges rival viruses.
• Big Media Companies Using P2P Networks for Promotion
  The novelty hasn't worn off yet.
  
• UK Court Rules Against Gray Market Importer
  Sony is still master of your PSP after you buy it.
  

[Permalink]

Digital Freedom Campaign Launches to Champion the Public's Rights in the Copyfight

Deeplink by Derek Slater

Today, the Digital Freedom campaign was launched by a broad coalition of groups including the Consumer Electronics Association, EFF, Public Knowledge, and the Media Access Project.

"Digital technology enables literally anyone and everyone to be a creator, an innovator or an artist -- to produce music, to create cutting-edge videos and photos, and to share their creative work. Digital technology empowers individuals to enjoy these new works when, where, and how they want, and to participate in the artistic process. These are basic freedoms that must be protected and nurtured.

"The Digital Freedom campaign is dedicated to defending the rights of students, artists, innovators, and consumers to create and make lawful use of new technologies free of unreasonable government restrictions and without fear of costly and abusive lawsuits."

Too often, the entertainment industry has been able to steer Congress' policy agenda towards draconian restrictions on innovation and fans' legitimate use of digital devices. It's high time to turn the tables and set a new, positive agenda for copyright. This campaign is another important step in the right direction.

[Permalink]

Dangerous Terms in MS Vista's EULA

Deeplink by Derek Slater

Before clicking the "I Agree" button that accompanies software products' dense End User License Agreements (EULA), it's always best to check with Infoworld's Ed Foster first. He is unrelenting in his careful criticisms of EULAs, and, this week, he takes on a section of Microsoft Vista's EULA that aims to stifle the speech of product reviewers and critics. He writes:

"[I]f Microsoft has the right to put even the mildest of restrictions on a consumer's rights to comment on their products, why can't a carmaker or an appliance manufacturer have a censorship clause hidden somewhere on their website? There is nothing is copyright law that gives software publishers the right to restrict the rights of their customers to criticize their products."

Last week, Brooklyn Law School Professor and former EFF Staff Attorney Wendy Seltzer highlighted a number of other dangerous terms in Vista's EULA. For a user's guide to EULAs, read EFF's white paper.

[Permalink]

RFIDs in Credit Cards Create Privacy Problems

Deeplink by Derek Slater

Yesterday, the New York Times published a troubling article about remotely-readable credit cards using Radio Frequency Identification (RFID) technology:

"[I]n tests on 20 cards from Visa, MasterCard and American Express, the researchers here found that the cardholder's name and other data was being transmitted without encryption and in plain text. They could skim and store the information from a card with a device the size of a couple of paperback books, which they cobbled together from readily available computer and radio components for $150.

"They say they could probably make another one even smaller and cheaper: about the size of a pack of gum for less than $50."

Read the whole thing here, and learn more about RFIDs.

[Permalink]

RIAA Says Compulsory Licensing Isn't Always So Bad

Deeplink by Derek Slater

A Copyright Office ruling last week may lower the price of ringtones, and, interestingly, you have the RIAA and its support for compulsory licensing to thank.

For a record label to distribute a CD or iTunes to sell a downloadable song, they need to secure the rights to the underlying musical composition, which is typically held by a music publisher or the song's composer. The Copyright Act compels composition rights holders to license these types of uses at rates set by Copyright Royalty Judges. At the request of the RIAA, the Copyright Office ruled that this compulsory "mechanical" license also applies to using compositions to create ringtones.

James DeLong asks, "Why was the RIAA, usually staunch in opposition to compulstory licensing, pushing for it in this case? Seems strange."

In fact, it's not so strange -- record labels have defended this compulsory license for decades as a boon to artists, rights holders, and the public.

Consider this quote from a 1967 House report on possible licensing reforms:

"[T]he record producers argued vigorously that the compulsory license system must be retained. They asserted that the record industry is a half-billion-dollar business of great economic importance in the United States and throughout the world; records today are the principal means of disseminating music, and this creates special problems, since performers need unhampered access to musical material on nondiscriminatory terms. Historically, the record producers pointed out, there were no recording rights before 1909 and the 1909 statute adopted the compulsory license as a deliberate anti-monopoly condition on the grant of these rights. They argue that the result has been an outpouring of recorded music, with the public being given lower prices, improved quality, and a greater choice."

Copyright Law Revision, Committee on the Judiciary, 90th Cong. 1st, Sess., Rep. No. 83 66 (March 8, 1967)

In a recent hearing, record labels argued that proposed expansions of the license to new forms of digital delivery were not broad enough. The RIAA similarly defended expansion of the license in comments to the Copyright Office:

"To effectively exempt ringtones from the compulsory licensing regime would allow music publishers to prevent commercialization of sound recordings in the important new mastertone marketplace, as well as to prevent creation and distribution of monophonic and polyphonic ringtones. Such actions would hurt artists, record companies, and digital music services, as well as consumers who are denied access to new musical products. This is not what Section 115 provides or what Congress intended."

In other words, the RIAA argues that extending the compulsory license best serves public policy goals, regardless of the narrow interests of certain copyright holders (publishers) who might want to hold back innovation. Of course, when the shoe is on the other foot, the RIAA is not so quick to embrace compulsory licenses; like the composers who decried the player piano and the compulsory mechanical license in 1909, the major record labels recoil in horror at compulsory licensing of sound recordings for digital and Internet uses. But make no mistake: the RIAA recognizes that a little compulsory licensed "piracy" can get copyright owners and artists appropriately compensated while leaving lots of room for innovation in both new technologies and new distribution channels.

Dragging the government in to set prices should generally be a last resort, and the history of composition licensing also has some lessons to teach about effective, voluntary alternatives. Just as songwriters formed collectives to offer blanket licenses for broadcast radio when it first emerged and disrupted their industry, so too could record labels license P2P file sharing and other novel uses today.

For more on this ruling, check out the Copyright Office's decision, the RIAA's initial and reply briefs as well as the National Music Publishers Association's initial and reply briefs. Bill Patry's blog has more substantive analysis.

[Permalink]