Online Policy Group v. Diebold, Inc.

Good Law
337 F. Supp. 2d 1195·2004 WL 2203382·72 U.S.P.Q. 2d (BNA) 1200·2004 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 19697
United States District Court, Northern District of CaliforniaSeptember 30, 2004C 03-04913 JFCalifornia4,869 words

Opinion

Opinion

Fogel, J.

ORDER GRANTING IN PART AND DENYING IN PART CROSS-MOTIONS FOR SUMMARY JUDGMENT

The parties have filed cross-motions for summary judgment seeking a determination as to what constitutes proper use of the internet service provider safe harbor provisions of the Digital Millennium Copyright Act. The Court has read the briefing submitted by the parties and has considered the oral arguments of counsel. For the reasons set forth below, both motions will be granted in part and denied in part.

I. BACKGROUND

Defendants Diebold, Inc. and Diebold Election Systems, Inc. (collectively “Die-bold”) produce electronic voting machines. The machines have been the subject of critical commentary. Both the reliability and verification procedures of the machines have been called into question, in part because not all of the machines provide a means for verifying whether a voter’s choice has been recorded correctly. It is undisputed that internal emails exchanged among Diebold employees (the “email archive”) contain evidence that some employees have acknowledged problems associated with the machines. See Plaintiffs’ Motion for Summary Judgment, pp. 3-4. According to Diebold, the email archive also…

Sign in to read the full opinion

Create a free account to read the complete opinion text, citation history, and good-law status for this case.