Basically these files fall under "fair use" and I can legally post them. Jim said it pretty well and I am doing pretty much what he is, his page can be found here
If Diebold diesagrees with that they can e-mail or call to talk to me about it. I am a reasonable law abiding citizen who is not going to break any laws and go to jail. If they can give me a good reason I will remove the files, but I doubt they can come up with any reason why I should. I will also not be intimidated by a simple cease and desist letter. If they want to talk I will listen, but as a political activist I am not going to back down from petty opening intimidation. If they try to jerk me around I will switch from simply hosting a few files to focusing the majority of my political energy to this cause.
Below I mostly cut and pasted from Mr. March's web site the reasons why I can do this legally.
1) I am not making any money off of this
In addition this will cost me money due to having to upgrade my webspace in order to handle the traffic and file sizes.
2) The material is subject to "fair use"
copyright provisions because it provides a public service: informing the public, media and government figures that the "security" of Diebold Election Systems is deliberately flawed in ways that strongly suggest an intent to commit voter fraud.
3) Most of the material in one way or another documents criminal activity on the part of Diebold Election Systems.
a) Setting up GEMS with zero effective security, by allowing MS-Access to alter GEMS voting data, passwords and audit trails. Even a cursory examination of the data files by anyone technically competent with MS-Access will reveal most of the extent of the problem.
b) Knowingly leaving these security flaws in place, because MS-Access was a "convenient tool" to modify the data, despite MS-Access never being approved or tested by ANY government agency as elections software. Internal Diebold EMails fully document this going back to at least the year 2000, and in 2001 fraudulent statements were made to the Federal Independent Testing Authority ("Metamor", now called Ciber Inc) regarding this security flaw - in an EMail message of October 18th 2001 by Ken Clark, Diebold Election System's "Senior Engineer" which also disparaged the technical abilities of said testing lab, apparantly with some authority.
c) In that same damning EMail, Mr. Clark mentions being able to tamper with vote data himself.
4) The data files are NOT Diebold property.
They are owned by the various county clients of Diebold, and in my opinion and study of the California Public Records Act, the files from California (Alameda and San Luis Obispo Counties) are public record. According to SLO County Registrar Julie Rodewald, the SLO County file is "live elections data" from the day of the 3/5/02 primaries, timestamped BEFORE the close of the polls (stamped 3:31pm) and containing "live vote data" (absentee ballots). Rodewald claims that this file was NOT released to Diebold by her or her staff, certainly not for public distribution on a Diebold website unprotected by any password at all. The file itself did have a primitive password which turns out to be "sophia" - Diebold technical staffer Sophia Lee was present at the county that day according to Rodewald, apparantly in violation of INS rules! (See also the "ElectionSupportGuide.pdf" file section 3.1 on "crossing the border" for instructions by Diebold Election Systems to their employees to violate US immigration law.)
5) The other major reason the Diebold Elections System copyright is invalid is that said copyrights cannot legally benefit Diebold Elections Systems.
Not without one hell of a large re-write. It is illegal to use the GEMS product in a US election. It passed Federal Elections Commission certification due to Diebold's deliberate fraud, and the laws of every state where electronic voting systems are used ban the use of programs and systems that can be tampered with. California Elections Code 19205 is a typical example:
19205. The Secretary of State shall establish the specifications for and the regulations governing voting machines, voting devices, vote tabulating devices, and any software used for each, including the programs and procedures for vote tabulating and testing. The criteria for establishing the specifications and regulations shall include, but not be limited to, the following: (a) The machine or device and its software shall be suitable for the purpose for which it is intended. (b) The system shall preserve the secrecy of the ballot. (c) The system shall be safe from fraud or manipulation.
GEMS emphatically does not comply with (a) or (c) above.
It is just as illegal to use GEMS to tally a California vote as it is to deal crack cocaine at a polling place. And Diebold technical staff have known this for years.
Therefore, no lawful income to Diebold can possibly be curtailed by my actions or the action of anyone else distributing Diebold Election Systems code, manuals and the like.
I am also a damaged party
I can not claim to be damaged quite as much as some others. I am however a political activist, what Diebold is doing violates my basic human rights which I am currently fighting very hard to defend. I have invested a lot of time and money to fight similar battles, what Diebold is doing will no doubt effect me and everyone I love greately if they get away with it. Voter fraud effects us all and is not to be taken lightly. I may go into more detail later but if there is one thing I have enough of, its proof that this effects me, my friends, and my family(some of which live in California) personally.