Democratic Underground Latest Greatest Lobby Journals Search Options Help Login
Google

Fresh Diebold Leaks, Keeping their software secret

Printer-friendly format Printer-friendly format
Printer-friendly format Email this thread to a friend
Printer-friendly format Bookmark this thread
This topic is archived.
Home » Discuss » Topic Forums » Activist HQ Donate to DU
 
the ether Donating Member (209 posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Mar-09-04 12:12 AM
Original message
Fresh Diebold Leaks, Keeping their software secret
Fresh Diebold Leaks, Keeping their software secret

Diebold Contracts with Georgia
leaked to Bev Harris

Full scoop at www.blackboxvoting.org

Here are some tips regarding what's in the contracts with Diebold in Georgia and Alameda County, California.



Diebold:

County shall not modify, translate, disassemble, decompile, reverse engineer or create derivative works based upon, or perform any other similar process on the System or any portion thereof.

Analysis:
Restricts the County from being able to obtain the source code for the software or otherwise reverse engineer any of the system and thus be capable of providing more information to any third party.





Diebold:

If the County receives a request pursuant to the Public Records Act that the County believes will require it to produce documents that Contractor (Diebold) has designated as confidential, the County will notify Contractor of the request. If Contractor requests that the County not produce the requested material, Contractor shall defend and indemnify the county from all costs and liability arising from the request, including attorney's fees.

This applies to documentation, source code, system pricing information, hardware, hardware and software service documentation, other information that is in a tangible form and marked confidential.


Analysis:

What they are doing with this provision is extending the trade secret disclosure rules. In this contract, Exhibits E and F define trade secrets to include any items designated as "confidential information." Exhibits E and F suggest that the County cannot release information at all unless ordered by a court or authorized by Diebold.

But OK, now, this also is pretty broad and when Diebold indemnifies the County for "all costs and liabilities arising from" records requests, sounds to me like Diebold is going to have to assume all costs to opposing release. Apparently, any public records request denied by Alameda County, if we fight it, will cost Diebold, not the taxpayer.


more at www.blackboxvoting.org
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top

Home » Discuss » Topic Forums » Activist HQ Donate to DU

Powered by DCForum+ Version 1.1 Copyright 1997-2002 DCScripts.com
Software has been extensively modified by the DU administrators


Important Notices: By participating on this discussion board, visitors agree to abide by the rules outlined on our Rules page. Messages posted on the Democratic Underground Discussion Forums are the opinions of the individuals who post them, and do not necessarily represent the opinions of Democratic Underground, LLC.

Home  |  Discussion Forums  |  Journals |  Store  |  Donate

About DU  |  Contact Us  |  Privacy Policy

Got a message for Democratic Underground? Click here to send us a message.

© 2001 - 2011 Democratic Underground, LLC