<?xml version="1.0" encoding="utf-8"?>
<rss version="2.0"
xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/"
xmlns:slash="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/slash/"
xmlns:wfw="http://wellformedweb.org/CommentAPI/">
<channel>
<title>Techdirt. Stories filed under &quot;election&quot;</title>
<description>Easily digestible tech news...</description>
<link>http://www.techdirt.com/</link>
<language>en-us</language>

<item>
<pubDate>Mon, 7 Jan 2013 20:02:00 PST</pubDate>
<title>Kenyan Filmmaker Who's Planning To Distribute His Documentary Via 'Pirates' Posts First Hour Of New Film On Youtube</title>
<dc:creator>Tim Cushing</dc:creator>
<link>http://www.techdirt.com/articles/20130107/15342621600/kenyan-filmmaker-whos-planning-to-distribute-his-documentary-via-pirates-posts-first-hour-new-film-youtube.shtml</link>
<guid>http://www.techdirt.com/articles/20130107/15342621600/kenyan-filmmaker-whos-planning-to-distribute-his-documentary-via-pirates-posts-first-hour-new-film-youtube.shtml</guid>
<description><![CDATA[ A couple months back we <a href="http://www.techdirt.com/articles/20121125/17525521138/kenyan-filmmaker-looking-to-cuts-costs-using-pirates-as-his-distributors.shtml" target="_blank">covered the story of Patrick Mureithi</a>, a Kenyan filmmaker who was raising money for a documentary on post-election violence in his home country. He was asking for $5,000 to cover travel expenses and some related costs and was hoping that Kenya&#39;s thriving "piracy industry" would handle the distribution end of the business, spreading his message of hope throughout his homeland.
<br /><br />
The good news is Murethi&#39;s <a href="http://www.indiegogo.com/kenya-untilhopeisfound?c=activity" target="_blank">Indiegogo campaign met its goal</a> and he is back in Kenya setting up viewings of his documentary and shooting more footage to add to it. It&#39;s still in its "first draft" stage according to Murethi, but he <a href="https://twitter.com/MureithiPatrick/status/287749837821186049" target="_blank">sent a message our way</a> informing us that he&#39;s uploaded the first hour of the still-unfinished documentary to Youtube.
<br />
<blockquote class="twitter-tweet tw-align-center" data-in-reply-to="274605969172987904"><p>@<a href="https://twitter.com/techdirt">techdirt</a> Here's the film. Please share it widely: <a href="http://t.co/m8IqHKxT" title="http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Ze6tG5dNIfc">youtube.com/watch?v=Ze6tG5&#8230;</a>Peace, p</p>&mdash; Patrick Mureithi (@MureithiPatrick) <a href="https://twitter.com/MureithiPatrick/status/287749837821186049" data-datetime="2013-01-06T02:38:02+00:00">January 6, 2013</a></blockquote>
<script async src="//platform.twitter.com/widgets.js" charset="utf-8"></script>
<br />
He&#39;s also <a href="http://patrickmureithi.blogspot.com/" target="_blank">blogging about his experiences returning to Kenya</a> (he currently lives in Missouri), including <a href="http://patrickmureithi.blogspot.com/2012/12/welcome-to-kenya.html" target="_blank">this "fun" little shakedown at the hands of customs</a> at Jomo Kenyatta International Airport:
<blockquote>
<i>Custom&#39;s dude @ the airport: Hello? What do you have in those bags?<br />
Me: Some clothes and my camera equipment.<br />
Dude: What are you doing with this equipment?<br />
Me: I&#39;m working on a documentary about healing from trauma after post-election violence.<br />
Dude: Are you a press-man?<br />
Me: No.<br />
Dude: Where is your filming permit?<br />
Me: I don&#39;t have one<br />
Dude: Then we have to keep your equipment until you get a permit<br />
Me: I find it hard to leave this equipment here after all the sacrifice it took to get it<br />
Dude: Go talk to that lady (presumably his superior)</i>
<br /><br />
<i>- - -</i>
<br /><br />
<i>Lady: What are you using this equipment for?<br />
(I explain what I did to dude)<br />
Lady: But this happened five years ago!<br />
Me: Yes, but the trauma has not gone away, and will not go away with time<br />
Lady: How will it go away then?<br />
Me: Through education about trauma and teaching various ways that we can heal<br />
Lady: This is a <b>very</b> controversial film. You need a permit, and you need to leave your equipment with us until you get one.<br />
Me: Please, madam, this is not agreeable with me<br />
Lady: Go see that man in that office</i>
<br /><br />
<i>- - -</i>
<br /><br />
<i>Man in office: Where is your permit?<br />
(The Dance repeats itself. 45 minutes in total)<br />
Man: We&#39;ll let you go with your equipment, but you have to pay 1% of the equipment&#39;s cost, non-refundable</i>
<br /><br />
<i>I pay, and scurry off to meet my father who has been patiently waiting, sipping coffee through a straw.</i>
<br /><br />
<i>Karibu Kenya.</i>
</blockquote>
Apparently only non-controversial films are allowed to roam permit-free, unless you&#39;re willing to pay a non-refundable "deposit" on equipment you own. A bit of a rough start to be sure, but more recent posts seem a bit more upbeat.
<br /><br />
Hopefully, Murethi will keep us posted on any new developments, including the implementation of his scofflaw distribution system once the film is completed.<br /><br /><a href="http://www.techdirt.com/articles/20130107/15342621600/kenyan-filmmaker-whos-planning-to-distribute-his-documentary-via-pirates-posts-first-hour-new-film-youtube.shtml">Permalink</a> | <a href="http://www.techdirt.com/articles/20130107/15342621600/kenyan-filmmaker-whos-planning-to-distribute-his-documentary-via-pirates-posts-first-hour-new-film-youtube.shtml#comments">Comments</a> | <a href="http://www.techdirt.com/articles/20130107/15342621600/kenyan-filmmaker-whos-planning-to-distribute-his-documentary-via-pirates-posts-first-hour-new-film-youtube.shtml?op=sharethis">Email This Story</a><br />
 ]]></description>
<slash:department>staying-connected-and-spreading-the-word</slash:department>
<wfw:commentRss>http://www.techdirt.com/comment_rss.php?sid=20130107/15342621600</wfw:commentRss>
</item>
<item>
<pubDate>Fri, 9 Nov 2012 10:38:55 PST</pubDate>
<title>Obama's Tech Team Was Firing On All Cylinders While Romney's Was Still In Beta</title>
<dc:creator>Mike Masnick</dc:creator>
<link>http://www.techdirt.com/articles/20121109/02124720981/obamas-tech-team-was-firing-all-cylinders-while-romneys-was-still-beta.shtml</link>
<guid>http://www.techdirt.com/articles/20121109/02124720981/obamas-tech-team-was-firing-all-cylinders-while-romneys-was-still-beta.shtml</guid>
<description><![CDATA[ Obviously some of the following may be biased by the hindsight view of who won and who lost -- but it's fascinating to see two very, very different stories emerge about the technology/data teams involved in the two major party presidential campaigns.  Right after the election, Time published an account of <a href="http://swampland.time.com/2012/11/07/inside-the-secret-world-of-quants-and-data-crunchers-who-helped-obama-win/" target="_blank">a massive and extremely sophisticated datacrunching team</a> working to get President Obama re-elected.
<blockquote><i>
The new megafile didn&#8217;t just tell the campaign how to find voters and get their attention; it also allowed the number crunchers to run tests predicting which types of people would be persuaded by certain kinds of appeals. Call lists in field offices, for instance, didn&#8217;t just list names and numbers; they also ranked names in order of their persuadability, with the campaign&#8217;s most important priorities first. About 75% of the determining factors were basics like age, sex, race, neighborhood and voting record. Consumer data about voters helped round out the picture. &#8220;We could [predict] people who were going to give online. We could model people who were going to give through mail. We could model volunteers,&#8221; said one of the senior advisers about the predictive profiles built by the data. &#8220;In the end, modeling became something way bigger for us in &#8217;12 than in &#8217;08 because it made our time more efficient.&#8221;
<br /><br />
Early on, for example, the campaign discovered that people who had unsubscribed from the 2008 campaign e-mail lists were top targets, among the easiest to pull back into the fold with some personal attention. The strategists fashioned tests for specific demographic groups, trying out message scripts that they could then apply. They tested how much better a call from a local volunteer would do than a call from a volunteer from a non&#8211;swing state like California. As Messina had promised, assumptions were rarely left in place without numbers to back them up.
</i></blockquote>
Compare that, then, to the data driven efforts on the Romney side.  First, the campaign ignored all the public polls that turned out to be <a href="http://www.techdirt.com/articles/20121107/07473420959/why-press-is-getting-wrong-message-out-nate-silver-walloped-pundits-story.shtml">fairly accurate</a> and plugged in a <a href="http://www.cbsnews.com/8301-250_162-57547239/adviser-romney-shellshocked-by-loss/?pageNum=2&#038;tag=page" target="_blank">bunch of their own assumptions</a> when looking at key variables, all of which made them believe they had a stronger position than it turned out they had.  But, much more interesting are the stories coming out about ORCA, the Romney campaign's secret computerized weapon in the "get out the vote" effort.  It's like the exact opposite of the description of the Obama campaign's data tool.
<br /><br />
Romney campaign volunteer John Ekdahl's <a href="http://ace.mu.nu/archives/334783.php" target="_blank">description of how poorly planned out ORCA was</a> is a must-read.  It really sounds like the team there didn't do much testing, and failed to consider how the system would work under load.  From the explanations, it also sounds like they didn't do much usability testing, or even think through some basic use cases.  It sounds as though either the Romney team didn't think ORCA was ready or they didn't want to "reveal" it until the last minute to avoid tipping their hand to Obama's campaign.  The night before the election, they sent volunteers who were supposed to be poll watchers a huge PDF with instructions -- expecting them to print it out, which isn't so easy for everyone these days.  They also forgot to tell them they needed to get and bring their "poll watcher certificate" to polling places.  And they didn't release the actual app until 6am on election day, giving volunteers no time at all to learn how it worked (or to report bugs).
<blockquote><i>
Now a note about the technology itself. For starters, this was billed as an "app" when it was actually a mobile-optimized website (or "web app"). For days I saw people on Twitter saying they couldn't find the app on the Android Market or iTunes and couldn't download it. Well, that's because it didn't exist. It was a website. This created a ton of confusion. Not to mention that they didn't even "turn it on" until 6AM in the morning, so people couldn't properly familiarize themselves with how it worked on their personal phone beforehand.
<br /><br />
Next, and this part I find mind-boggingly absurd, the web address was located at "https://www.whateveritwas.com/orca". Notice the "s" after http. This denotes it's a secure connection, something that's used for e-commerce and web-based email. So far, so good. The problem is that they didn't auto-forward the regular "http" to "https" and as a result, many people got a blank page and thought the system was down. Setting up forwarding is the simplest thing in the world and only takes seconds, but they failed to do it. This is compounded by the fact that mobile browsers default to "http" when you just start with "www" (as 95% of the world does).
<br /><br />
By 2PM, I had completely given up. I finally got ahold of someone at around 1PM and I never heard back. From what I understand, the entire system crashed at around 4PM. I'm not sure if that's true, but it wouldn't surprise me. I decided to wait for my wife to get home from work to vote, which meant going very late (around 6:15PM). Here's the kicker, I never got a call to go out and vote. So, who the hell knows if that end of it was working either.
</i></blockquote>
A different report points to similarly <a href="http://www.breitbart.com/Big-Government/2012/11/08/Orca-How-the-Romney-Campaign-Suppressed-Its-Own-Vote" target="_blank">massive problems with other aspects of ORCA</a>, including handing out <i>the wrong PINs</i>, making the app useless in Colorado (and possibly elsewhere):
<blockquote><i>
Then at 6PM they admitted they had issued the wrong PINs to every volunteer in Colorado, and reissued new PINs (which also didn't work). Meanwhile, counties where we had hundreds of volunteers, such as Denver Colorado, showed zero volunteers in the system all day, but we weren't allowed to add them. In one area, the head of the Republican Party plus 10 volunteers were all locked out. The system went down for a half hour during peak voting, but for hundreds or more, it never worked all day. Many of the poll watchers I spoke with were very discouraged. Many members of our phone bank got up and left.
</i></blockquote>
Once again, I'm sure that the Obama system wasn't nearly as perfect and all-knowing as the Time article describes.  Nor was the Romney system a total disaster as described in those links -- but it is fascinating to see these stories emerge following the election.  Given the Obama win, along with these stories about that datacrunching effort <i>and</i> the worldwide reverence towards Nate Silver, you can bet that everyone gunning for the 2016 nomination is going to spend some time trying to build up a killer technical/data team.<br /><br /><a href="http://www.techdirt.com/articles/20121109/02124720981/obamas-tech-team-was-firing-all-cylinders-while-romneys-was-still-beta.shtml">Permalink</a> | <a href="http://www.techdirt.com/articles/20121109/02124720981/obamas-tech-team-was-firing-all-cylinders-while-romneys-was-still-beta.shtml#comments">Comments</a> | <a href="http://www.techdirt.com/articles/20121109/02124720981/obamas-tech-team-was-firing-all-cylinders-while-romneys-was-still-beta.shtml?op=sharethis">Email This Story</a><br />
 ]]></description>
<slash:department>wow</slash:department>
<wfw:commentRss>http://www.techdirt.com/comment_rss.php?sid=20121109/02124720981</wfw:commentRss>
</item>
<item>
<pubDate>Tue, 6 Nov 2012 03:39:40 PST</pubDate>
<title>Organizations Try To Shame People Into Voting By Revealing How Often They  &#038; Their Neighbors Voted</title>
<dc:creator>Mike Masnick</dc:creator>
<link>http://www.techdirt.com/articles/20121105/17075320941/organizations-try-to-shame-people-into-voting-revealing-how-often-they-their-neighbors-voted.shtml</link>
<guid>http://www.techdirt.com/articles/20121105/17075320941/organizations-try-to-shame-people-into-voting-revealing-how-often-they-their-neighbors-voted.shtml</guid>
<description><![CDATA[ It's election day.  While your actual ballot is (supposed to be) secret, a lot of people don't know that <i>whether or not you voted at all</i> is public information.  A few weeks back, <i>On the Media</i> covered some ways that campaigns try to <a href="http://www.onthemedia.org/2012/oct/12/covering-the-modern-campaign/" target="_blank">get out the vote</a> and looked at some research suggesting that letters to people with a "voter report card" showing when they've voted in the past was a somewhat effective way of shaming people into voting.  An even more extreme example was given as well: a letter that specifically shows how often your neighbors have voted.  In the piece, OTM producer Chris Neary noted that while such things were effective in the lab, people shouldn't be expecting such letters for real, because, while they may be effective in getting out the vote, they also freak people out on privacy grounds, and no campaign wants to risk freaking people out:
<blockquote><i>
And, by the way Brooke, you&#8217;ll never get that last letter. Campaigns hate to send out anything that prompts virulent hate mail in return, and one of those researchers got some of that mail.
</i></blockquote>
Except... Neary has now posted an apology blog post after some OTM listeners reached out to share <a href="http://www.onthemedia.org/blogs/on-the-media/2012/nov/05/mail-shames-you-voting/" target="_blank">exactly the kinds of mailers discussed</a>.  While campaigns might shy away from such tactics, apparently third party organizations read the exact same research and took it to heart -- as they're a lot less worried about hate mail:
<blockquote><i>
First, listener Rachel Lieberman got a voter report card mailing from MoveOn.org. (She notes that the report card isn't accurate, she just voted at a different address. Here's hoping it doesn't lower her citizen GPA.)
<center>
<a href="http://imgur.com/uIUf4"><img src="http://i.imgur.com/uIUf4.jpg" width=400 /></a><br />
<a href="http://imgur.com/Me089"><img src="http://i.imgur.com/Me089.jpg" width=400 /></a>
</center>
And from listener Taylor Maxwell, exactly the sort of letter I went out of my way to claim she probably wouldn't get. It's from Americans for Limited Government. Names and addresses redacted, or else we'd be co-shaming.
<center>
<a href="http://imgur.com/vlHUT"><img src="http://i.imgur.com/vlHUT.jpg" width=400 /></a>
</center>
</i></blockquote>
So, yes, this tactic appears to be in use across the political spectrum, and yes, it's likely mostly serving to creep people out... though it may also get them to go out and vote...<br /><br /><a href="http://www.techdirt.com/articles/20121105/17075320941/organizations-try-to-shame-people-into-voting-revealing-how-often-they-their-neighbors-voted.shtml">Permalink</a> | <a href="http://www.techdirt.com/articles/20121105/17075320941/organizations-try-to-shame-people-into-voting-revealing-how-often-they-their-neighbors-voted.shtml#comments">Comments</a> | <a href="http://www.techdirt.com/articles/20121105/17075320941/organizations-try-to-shame-people-into-voting-revealing-how-often-they-their-neighbors-voted.shtml?op=sharethis">Email This Story</a><br />
 ]]></description>
<slash:department>that's-just-going-to-piss-people-off</slash:department>
<wfw:commentRss>http://www.techdirt.com/comment_rss.php?sid=20121105/17075320941</wfw:commentRss>
</item>
<item>
<pubDate>Mon, 5 Nov 2012 16:02:46 PST</pubDate>
<title>The Public Apparently Isn't Interested In Sound Economics</title>
<dc:creator>Mike Masnick</dc:creator>
<link>http://www.techdirt.com/articles/20121102/18024020924/public-apparently-isnt-interested-sound-economics.shtml</link>
<guid>http://www.techdirt.com/articles/20121102/18024020924/public-apparently-isnt-interested-sound-economics.shtml</guid>
<description><![CDATA[ So I hear there's some sort of election happening this week (have you heard anything about it?).  Earlier this year, we wrote about an awesome effort by the folks at NPR's Planet Money to bring together a group of five different economists, from all over the political spectrum, and see if they could find points that <a href="http://www.techdirt.com/articles/20120720/17003619778/disconnect-between-economists-politicians.shtml">all of them agreed upon</a>.  They came up with a list of six things that all of them agreed would be smart ideas for a President to implement -- and what was striking about all six was that not a single one of them was anywhere near politically tenable.  Every one of them would be argued down immediately.  
<br /><br />
Part of the problem, honestly, was that nearly all of them required understanding a) a little bit of economics and b) being willing to understand nuanced situations and how different moves reverberate through the economy.  Those, unfortunately, are rather difficult things -- and it was seen in our comments too.  We had over 200 comments, and many of them showed exactly that problem.  People made broad, sweeping generalizations based on the short one-sentence versions, without understanding the details or the nuances.  Also, ridiculously, many people insisted that the plans were all a nefarious plot of one particular side of the political spectrum, totally ignoring the <i>fact</i> that the economists came from all sides.  The idea that, for example, anyone might consider economists Dean Baker or Bob Frank "right wing" is so hilarious as to defy comment.
<br /><br />
Since then, Planet Money continued the series with some really interesting followups.  First they discussed some of the <a href="http://www.npr.org/blogs/money/2012/09/14/161165345/episode-402-free-heroin-and-other-ideas-that-wont-get-you-elected" target="_blank">ideas that the economists couldn't agree on</a> (free heroin!).  Then it got fun.  They brought in some political spin-meisters to take the policy planks that everyone admitted would never get very far coming out of a real politician's mouth and see if they could <a href="http://www.npr.org/blogs/money/2012/09/28/161967973/episode-406-making-economics-sexy" target="_blank">spin them positively</a>.   It's a really enjoyable/scary episode, in which complex economic ideas are reduced to crowd pleasing soundbites, mostly focused on misdirecting people from reality and, well, accentuating the positive.
<br /><br />
Finally, last week, they decided to <a href="http://www.npr.org/blogs/money/2012/10/26/163715697/episode-413-our-fake-candidate-meets-the-people" target="_blank">focus group the ideas</a> and proved what we already knew: that the ideas, when explained to everyday Americans, were immediately and sometimes caustically shot down as being horrible, horrible ideas.  They then tried to take some of the spin-meister versions, and present them as commercials... and got a <i>little</i> budge from a few people, but that was about it.  In the end, it was clear that these ideas -- no matter how good they might be -- would immediately be shot down by the public, meaning that any candidate who proposed them wouldn't have much luck.
<br /><br />
That's somewhat depressing, but a sign of the world we live in today.  I'd argue that a big part of the problem is that nearly all of the proposals involve what appears to be short-term pain for long-term benefit -- and we live in such a short-term focused society.  But as someone who tends to think that we really need much more understanding of economics and its impact among the general populace, this kind of thing only confirms how weak our economics education is today.<br /><br /><a href="http://www.techdirt.com/articles/20121102/18024020924/public-apparently-isnt-interested-sound-economics.shtml">Permalink</a> | <a href="http://www.techdirt.com/articles/20121102/18024020924/public-apparently-isnt-interested-sound-economics.shtml#comments">Comments</a> | <a href="http://www.techdirt.com/articles/20121102/18024020924/public-apparently-isnt-interested-sound-economics.shtml?op=sharethis">Email This Story</a><br />
 ]]></description>
<slash:department>this-is-unfortunate</slash:department>
<wfw:commentRss>http://www.techdirt.com/comment_rss.php?sid=20121102/18024020924</wfw:commentRss>
</item>
<item>
<pubDate>Mon, 5 Nov 2012 07:31:37 PST</pubDate>
<title>New Jersey To Let 'Displaced' Voters Use Electronic Voting... If They Give Up Secrecy &#038; Return A Hardcopy</title>
<dc:creator>Mike Masnick</dc:creator>
<link>http://www.techdirt.com/articles/20121104/23000620929/new-jersey-to-let-displaced-voters-use-electronic-voting-if-they-give-up-secrecy-return-hardcopy.shtml</link>
<guid>http://www.techdirt.com/articles/20121104/23000620929/new-jersey-to-let-displaced-voters-use-electronic-voting-if-they-give-up-secrecy-return-hardcopy.shtml</guid>
<description><![CDATA[ Given the still ongoing recovery from Hurricane Sandy in the northeast, New Jersey has decided to deal with potential problems with Tuesday's election by declaring that "displaced" voters <a href="http://www.cbsnews.com/8301-34222_162-57544864/n.j-n.y-make-more-voting-changes-due-to-sandy/" target="_blank">can qualify to submit ballots the same way overseas</a> members of the armed services can -- via email or fax, followed up with a hardcopy.  They're also allowing early voting, more provisional voting and absentee voting, but the ability to submit by email is generating plenty of attention.  Some, like professor Richard Hasen, who is an "election law" expert, worries about the security of such a system, and whether or not ballots could get hacked or lost.  Professor Andrew Appel, who has done work with e-voting systems in the past, <a href="https://freedom-to-tinker.com/blog/appel/nj-lt-governor-invites-voters-to-submit-invalid-ballots/" target="_blank">worries about two things</a>.  First, the loss of the secret ballot when you vote this way:
<blockquote><i>
We see already one problem:  The loss of the secret ballot.  At many times in the 20th century, NJ political machines put such intense pressure on voters that the secret ballot was an important protection.  In 2012 it&#8217;s in the news that some corporations are pressuring their employees to vote in certain ways.  The secret ballot is still critical to the functioning of democracy.
</i></blockquote>
But, he's also worried about the unclear nature of <a href="http://www.state.nj.us/state/elections/2012-results/directive-email-voting.pdf" target="_blank">the announcement</a> (pdf), in which it is not emphasized that anyone who votes this way must <b>also</b> submit a hardcopy.  He notes that the directive about allowing displaced voters to vote this way left out the line about submitting the hardcopy, and the law <i>is not clear</i> what happens to votes where the hardcopy is not sent as well.  The fear then, is that these votes will wind up in court.
<blockquote><i>

Then things really get murky:  The statute doesn&#8217;t say what happens if the hardcopy is not received, except that the county superintendent of elections must investigate.  It&#8217;s not difficult to imagine that these ballots will end up in court.
<br /><br />
I urge the Lieutenant Governor to issue a revised order, clarifying that displaced voters must immediately follow up by mailing hardcopy identical to their e-mailed ballot&#8211;or risk having their votes thrown out.
</i></blockquote>
It does sound like officials in New Jersey now understand this and intend to be much clearer about it, but it is raising reasonable concerns.
<br /><br />
Finally, well-known e-voting critic (and New Jersey resident) Ed Felten has actually taken a much more <a href="https://freedom-to-tinker.com/blog/felten/new-jersey-voting-in-the-aftermath-of-hurricane-sandy/" target="_blank">"it's not great, but given the situation, it's okay" type of position</a>.
<blockquote><i>
I am in no way a fan of online voting. Just last week I hosted an <a href="https://citp.princeton.edu/event/e-voting-risk-and-opportunity/">online symposium</a> where experts talked about the many barriers to secure online voting.  But under these circumstances I can understand why the State has taken the steps it has.  The email+hardcopy approach will undermine ballot secrecy, and inevitably some voters will forfeit their votes by failing to submit the follow-on hardcopy ballot correctly.  But at the same time, the state is allowing citizens who are facing a tough situation a greater chance to cast their votes.  I would strongly oppose any long-term move toward online voting, but I can see the point of allowing limited email+hardcopy voting for displaced voters under these very unusual circumstances.
</i></blockquote>
If the voting in New Jersey turns out weird tomorrow, the conspiracy theories are never going to stop...<br /><br /><a href="http://www.techdirt.com/articles/20121104/23000620929/new-jersey-to-let-displaced-voters-use-electronic-voting-if-they-give-up-secrecy-return-hardcopy.shtml">Permalink</a> | <a href="http://www.techdirt.com/articles/20121104/23000620929/new-jersey-to-let-displaced-voters-use-electronic-voting-if-they-give-up-secrecy-return-hardcopy.shtml#comments">Comments</a> | <a href="http://www.techdirt.com/articles/20121104/23000620929/new-jersey-to-let-displaced-voters-use-electronic-voting-if-they-give-up-secrecy-return-hardcopy.shtml?op=sharethis">Email This Story</a><br />
 ]]></description>
<slash:department>details,-details</slash:department>
<wfw:commentRss>http://www.techdirt.com/comment_rss.php?sid=20121104/23000620929</wfw:commentRss>
</item>
<item>
<pubDate>Mon, 14 May 2012 10:19:00 PDT</pubDate>
<title>German Pirate Party Wins Seats In Fourth Straight State Election</title>
<dc:creator>Mike Masnick</dc:creator>
<link>http://www.techdirt.com/articles/20120513/23472618897/german-pirate-party-wins-seats-fourth-straight-state-election.shtml</link>
<guid>http://www.techdirt.com/articles/20120513/23472618897/german-pirate-party-wins-seats-fourth-straight-state-election.shtml</guid>
<description><![CDATA[ It now seems pretty clear that the German Pirate Party is a legitimate player in that country.  A week after its <a href="http://www.techdirt.com/articles/20120507/00072118797/pirate-party-wins-again-germany.shtml">third straight win</a> in local state elections, the German Pirate Party appears to have <a href="http://falkvinge.net/2012/05/13/german-pirate-party-scores-fourth-consecutive-election-win/" target="_blank">won a similar percentage of votes</a> in the country's largest region, North Rhine-Westphalia.  The estimates are that it will end up with 18 seats on a little under 8% of the vote (<b>Update</b>: more final results are now showing <a href="http://www.wahlergebnisse.nrw.de/landtagswahlen/2012/aktuell/dateien/a133lw1200.html" target="_blank">20 seats</a>, so it's an even larger victory).  In Berlin, Saarland and Schleswig-Holstein, the party was able to get similar votes as well, suggesting that this isn't a regional thing and has become a recognizable force -- especially among young people in Germany.  The real question now is if it can use this to create some momentum going into the national elections next year.
<br /><br />
Separately, it's worth pointing out that this result came about after it was noted a few days ago that the German Pirate Party's website <a href="http://falkvinge.net/2012/05/10/three-days-before-elections-largest-german-state-censors-pirate-party-from-the-net/" target="_blank">was being censored</a> in state schools, by a filter that claimed that the site was about "illegal drugs".  It seems like pretty blatant censorship to block a political party's website -- even if it was "accidental" -- for daring to question the prevailing law enforcement regime around certain banned substances.<br /><br /><a href="http://www.techdirt.com/articles/20120513/23472618897/german-pirate-party-wins-seats-fourth-straight-state-election.shtml">Permalink</a> | <a href="http://www.techdirt.com/articles/20120513/23472618897/german-pirate-party-wins-seats-fourth-straight-state-election.shtml#comments">Comments</a> | <a href="http://www.techdirt.com/articles/20120513/23472618897/german-pirate-party-wins-seats-fourth-straight-state-election.shtml?op=sharethis">Email This Story</a><br />
 ]]></description>
<slash:department>it's-becoming-a-movement</slash:department>
<wfw:commentRss>http://www.techdirt.com/comment_rss.php?sid=20120513/23472618897</wfw:commentRss>
</item>
<item>
<pubDate>Tue, 24 Apr 2012 23:02:00 PDT</pubDate>
<title>French Tweeters Get Around Ban On Tweeting Election Results Using WWII-Era Codes</title>
<dc:creator>Mike Masnick</dc:creator>
<link>http://www.techdirt.com/articles/20120423/02323118600/french-tweeters-get-around-ban-tweeting-election-results-using-wwii-era-codes.shtml</link>
<guid>http://www.techdirt.com/articles/20120423/02323118600/french-tweeters-get-around-ban-tweeting-election-results-using-wwii-era-codes.shtml</guid>
<description><![CDATA[ Last week, we wrote about how French Twitter users were being <a href="http://www.techdirt.com/articles/20120416/08493318503/french-voters-warned-to-stay-off-social-media-lest-they-bugger-election.shtml">warned</a> not to use social media tools like Twitter to reveal local polling or election results before all the French voting booths closed in the Presidential election.  We pointed out how silly this was, and it appears that folks in France used a simple mechanism to get around the rules: <a href="http://www.france24.com/en/20120422-frustrated-twitter-users-circumvent-french-election-law-world-war-two-codes?ns_campaign=editorial&#038;ns_source=FB&#038;ns_mchannel=reseaux_sociaux&#038;ns_fee=0&#038;ns_linkname=20120422_frustrated_twitter_users_circumvent_french_election" target="_blank">using WWII-era coding techniques</a> to share information in the same manner that the French Resistance used:
<blockquote><i>
As a result, incumbent Nicolas Sarkozy became either Tokaji wine which, like his father, comes from Hungary, or Rolex because of his perceived "bling-bling" lifestyle.
<br /><br />
His Socialist opponent Francois Hollande was either Gouda cheese (from Holland) or a soft, sweet "Flanby" caramel desert -- an old and unforgiving nickname for the portly frontrunner.
<br /><br />
Far-right candidate Marine Le Pen was associated with the names of totalitarian regimes or rodents and Communist Party-backed Jean-Luc Melenchon was either a rotten tomato or something linked to the former Soviet Union.
</i></blockquote>
From there, it sounds like people just had fun with it, figuring out all sorts of ways to obliquely refer to the different candidates and how well they were doing without directly referring to any of them.  Once again, the internet views censorship as an obstacle, and routes around it, through a rather creative form of "encryption."<br /><br /><a href="http://www.techdirt.com/articles/20120423/02323118600/french-tweeters-get-around-ban-tweeting-election-results-using-wwii-era-codes.shtml">Permalink</a> | <a href="http://www.techdirt.com/articles/20120423/02323118600/french-tweeters-get-around-ban-tweeting-election-results-using-wwii-era-codes.shtml#comments">Comments</a> | <a href="http://www.techdirt.com/articles/20120423/02323118600/french-tweeters-get-around-ban-tweeting-election-results-using-wwii-era-codes.shtml?op=sharethis">Email This Story</a><br />
 ]]></description>
<slash:department>gouda-cheese</slash:department>
<wfw:commentRss>http://www.techdirt.com/comment_rss.php?sid=20120423/02323118600</wfw:commentRss>
</item>
<item>
<pubDate>Tue, 17 Apr 2012 05:08:00 PDT</pubDate>
<title>French Voters Warned To Stay Off Social Media Lest They 'Crash The Election'</title>
<dc:creator>Leigh Beadon</dc:creator>
<link>http://www.techdirt.com/articles/20120416/08493318503/french-voters-warned-to-stay-off-social-media-lest-they-bugger-election.shtml</link>
<guid>http://www.techdirt.com/articles/20120416/08493318503/french-voters-warned-to-stay-off-social-media-lest-they-bugger-election.shtml</guid>
<description><![CDATA[ <p><em><strong>Update:</strong> Apparently the Guardian made a translation error, and the French 'bugger' is actually borrowed from the English 'bug' (as in computer bug) and just means 'crash'.</em></p>

<p>Last year, we <a href="http://www.techdirt.com/articles/20110421/16062913992/canadians-face-fines-jail-time-if-they-tweet-election-result-news-prior-to-west-coast-poll-closings.shtml">wrote</a> about a situation developing in Canada, where a strict reading of legacy election laws made it illegal for east-coast voters to discuss exit polls on Facebook or Twitter until polling stations across the country had officially closed. Now, the Guardian reports that a <a href="http://www.guardian.co.uk/world/french-election-blog-2012/2012/apr/16/twitter-french-presidential-election-facebook" target="_blank">more or less identical situation has cropped up in France</a>, where newspapers and regulators are warning citizens to keep mum about early results in the upcoming presidential election.</p>

<blockquote><em>French law prohibits the media from publishing polls or exit surveys between midnight on the Friday before election day until all the voting stations have closed on Sunday &#8211; 8pm in cities and 6pm in towns.
<br /><br />
This is strictly upheld. Because of time differences, French voters in overseas territories and departments, such as Martinique and Guadeloupe, will have gone to the polls the previous day; knowing early results in areas where the outcome is expected to be close could influence last-minute voters.
<br /><br />
The French commission for opinion polls has ruled that Twitter and Facebook fall within the legal definition of media and are bound by the law.
<br /><br />
The Journal du Dimanche headlined an article about the situation: "Twitter fera-t-il bugger l'&eacute;lection?" (Will Twitter <del>bugger</del> <strong>crash</strong> the election?)</em></blockquote>

<p>As we noted last year with regard to Canada, such laws are holdovers from a time when the national media was controlled by a few key players. In the modern world, where everyone is the media, they are completely impractical. And indeed, as the Canadian election wrapped up, it became clear that citizens were <a href="http://www.techdirt.com/articles/20110502/23571414124/canadians-ignore-ban-tweeting-election-results.shtml">completely ignoring the rule</a>, even going so far as to set up a website dedicated to aggregating such tweets. In fact it seemed that the law actually drove <em>more</em> people to share early results online&mdash;and then the whole story sort of fizzled, when Elections Canada admitted that they only investigate and enforce the law in response to specific complaints.</p>

<p>As the Guardian notes, such a law is perhaps more significant in France, where the overseas territories mean the polling window spans two days. But, whatever arguments there may be for protecting the sanctity of elections, the law is still unenforceable. I suspect we'll see the same disregard in France as we did in Canada&mdash;and probably the same lack of repercussions, depending on the outcome of the vote. Someday, somewhere in the world, we may see a close election get contested on the grounds that such a law was broken&mdash;and that will spark a huge debate about the role of social media and the internet in election polling. But for now, it's unlikely that many people will heed the warnings and alter their behavior.</p><br /><br /><a href="http://www.techdirt.com/articles/20120416/08493318503/french-voters-warned-to-stay-off-social-media-lest-they-bugger-election.shtml">Permalink</a> | <a href="http://www.techdirt.com/articles/20120416/08493318503/french-voters-warned-to-stay-off-social-media-lest-they-bugger-election.shtml#comments">Comments</a> | <a href="http://www.techdirt.com/articles/20120416/08493318503/french-voters-warned-to-stay-off-social-media-lest-they-bugger-election.shtml?op=sharethis">Email This Story</a><br />
 ]]></description>
<slash:department>not-likely</slash:department>
<wfw:commentRss>http://www.techdirt.com/comment_rss.php?sid=20120416/08493318503</wfw:commentRss>
</item>
<item>
<pubDate>Thu, 3 Mar 2011 13:27:06 PST</pubDate>
<title>Guy Sues Facebook For His Failure To Be Elected To Congress</title>
<dc:creator>Mike Masnick</dc:creator>
<link>http://www.techdirt.com/articles/20110303/11200213354/guy-sues-facebook-his-failure-to-be-elected-to-congress.shtml</link>
<guid>http://www.techdirt.com/articles/20110303/11200213354/guy-sues-facebook-his-failure-to-be-elected-to-congress.shtml</guid>
<description><![CDATA[ Another day, another silly lawsuit.  <a href="https://twitter.com/#!/InternetLaw/statuses/43375066154680320" target="_blank">Michael Scott</a> points us to this hilarious lawsuit from Majed Moughni, who tried to run for Congress last year in Michigan.  He came in fourth in the primaries, but he's <a href="http://detnews.com/article/20110224/METRO/102240372" target="_blank">suing <i>Facebook</i>, claiming it's responsible for his loss</a>.  How so?  Well, he claims that he was accumulating friends on Facebook in the lead up to the primaries, and then Facebook killed his account.  Facebook notes that his account was halted because of activity that appeared to be doing things similar to spammers -- and that users who face this issue are alerted to it before their accounts are cut off.  It seems likely that this lawsuit will get tossed out pretty damn quickly, as soon as Facebook points out that it has every right to deny service to folks based on a desire to protect users.  Section 230 allows companies to filter as they see fit and not see any liability for those choices, and it seems that this case should be covered.  Of course, for someone running for Congress, you would hope they actually understood the law on these issues, but I guess that's not really a requirement.<br /><br /><a href="http://www.techdirt.com/articles/20110303/11200213354/guy-sues-facebook-his-failure-to-be-elected-to-congress.shtml">Permalink</a> | <a href="http://www.techdirt.com/articles/20110303/11200213354/guy-sues-facebook-his-failure-to-be-elected-to-congress.shtml#comments">Comments</a> | <a href="http://www.techdirt.com/articles/20110303/11200213354/guy-sues-facebook-his-failure-to-be-elected-to-congress.shtml?op=sharethis">Email This Story</a><br />
 ]]></description>
<slash:department>proving-why-you-shouldn't-be-in-congress</slash:department>
<wfw:commentRss>http://www.techdirt.com/comment_rss.php?sid=20110303/11200213354</wfw:commentRss>
</item>
<item>
<pubDate>Fri, 5 Nov 2010 13:12:00 PDT</pubDate>
<title>Sorry, Net Neutrality Simply Was Not An Important Issue In This Year's Election</title>
<dc:creator>Mike Masnick</dc:creator>
<link>http://www.techdirt.com/articles/20101105/02472511738/sorry-net-neutrality-simply-was-not-an-important-issue-in-this-year-s-election.shtml</link>
<guid>http://www.techdirt.com/articles/20101105/02472511738/sorry-net-neutrality-simply-was-not-an-important-issue-in-this-year-s-election.shtml</guid>
<description><![CDATA[ This one is just amusing.  Scott Cleland, who works for the big broadband companies as a professional propagandist, and has a long history of making <a href="http://www.techdirt.com/search.php?q=scott+cleland&#038;eid=&#038;tid=&#038;aid=&#038;searchin=stories">absolutely ridiculous claims</a> in order to support their positions, apparently got a bit of traction from the non-thinking press, after he started pushing the message that <i>all</i> of the Democrats who signed a "pledge" to support network neutrality from the group the Progressive Change Campaign Committee (PCCC) lost in the recent election.  So, suddenly, it sounds like a referendum on net neutrality with the people saying they're against it.  Verizon was so excited about this that it even <a href="https://twitter.com/#!/Verizon/status/29585799515">Tweeted about it</a> and various folks in the press <a href="http://thehill.com/blogs/hillicon-valley/technology/127441-every-candidate-supporting-pcccs-net-neutrality-pledge-lost?sms_ss=twitter&#038;at_xt=4cd189fc8ce56005,0" target="_blank">parroted the claim</a> without really looking into the details.  Even CNN <a href="http://money.cnn.com/2010/11/03/technology/net_neutrality_election/" target="_blank">wrote an article about it</a>, suggesting this was the "final nail in the coffin for net neutrality."
<br /><br />
While I doubt any net neutrality legislation is going to get passed anyway (and, that's a good thing, because after the telcos got done with it, it wouldn't be what you wanted anyway), to suggest in any way that this election was a referendum on net neutrality is pure folly.  What the "press" left out is that the PCCC's net neutrality pledge was hardly the only such thing out there.  Also, the PCCC pledges were <b>not</b> from existing Representatives, but those trying to get elected to Congress against incumbents -- and nearly every one <a href="http://www.publicknowledge.org/blog/whats-number-why-election-had-nothing-do-net-" target="_blank">came from historically Republican districts</a>.  In other words, nearly every one of those Democrats who "lost," were guaranteed to lose no matter what.  On top of that, Broadband Reports took a look at <a href="http://www.dslreports.com/shownews/Verizon-Pretends-Neutrality-Support-Was-Political-Kryptonite-111237" target="_blank">a couple of other "net neutrality" pledges</a> by folks <b>actually</b> in Congress, and noted that a bunch of Democratic Representatives who signed an <b>anti</b>-Net Neutrality pledge still lost their races, and of those who signed on to a pro-net neutrality list, <b>not a single Democrat on that list lost their re-election bid</b>.   So, uh, it sorta suggests that a politician's stance on net neutrality had nothing to do with this election, and if you want to make up fake headlines that don't really mean anything, why would the press not mention any of the <b>relevant</b> facts, and simply parrot the fake story by a guy paid for propaganda?<br /><br /><a href="http://www.techdirt.com/articles/20101105/02472511738/sorry-net-neutrality-simply-was-not-an-important-issue-in-this-year-s-election.shtml">Permalink</a> | <a href="http://www.techdirt.com/articles/20101105/02472511738/sorry-net-neutrality-simply-was-not-an-important-issue-in-this-year-s-election.shtml#comments">Comments</a> | <a href="http://www.techdirt.com/articles/20101105/02472511738/sorry-net-neutrality-simply-was-not-an-important-issue-in-this-year-s-election.shtml?op=sharethis">Email This Story</a><br />
 ]]></description>
<slash:department>making-nothing-out-of-nothing</slash:department>
<wfw:commentRss>http://www.techdirt.com/comment_rss.php?sid=20101105/02472511738</wfw:commentRss>
</item>
<item>
<pubDate>Tue, 16 Jun 2009 04:26:18 PDT</pubDate>
<title>Twitter, Data Center Delay Upgrades Rather Than Cut Off Iranian Communications</title>
<dc:creator>Mike Masnick</dc:creator>
<link>http://www.techdirt.com/articles/20090615/1840295244.shtml</link>
<guid>http://www.techdirt.com/articles/20090615/1840295244.shtml</guid>
<description><![CDATA[ I recognize that it's still fashionable to bash Twitter as being a useless toy for people with too much free time (despite many, many examples of how useful it is for those who use it properly).  Yet, for anyone paying attention this past weekend, Twitter has emerged as an amazingly powerful communications tool as to <a href="http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2009/06/15/AR2009061502253.html" target="_new">what's happening in Iran</a>, where there are massive protests, riots, rallies and attacks following the disputed re-election of Mahmoud Ahmadinejad.  The <a href="http://iran.twazzup.com/" target="_new">Iran Twazzup page</a> has had a tremendous wealth of information from inside and outside Iran -- the sort of information that we wouldn't know about otherwise.  It's an amazing view into the country that simply wasn't possible in the past.  I remember in the runup to the war in Iraq, there were a few Iraqi bloggers you could follow to get a sense of what was going on in the country, but nothing like the massive ability of thousands of people to easily get the word out on what they're seeing on the streets of Tehran and elsewhere.  It's really quite impressive, and I'm hard pressed to see how anyone could look at what's coming out of Iran via Twitter, and then claiming that Twitter isn't a useful or different communication tool.
<br /><br />
With all that going on, it's fascinating to see that Twitter and its data center partner, NTT, have actually chosen to <a href="http://blog.twitter.com/2009/06/down-time-rescheduled.html" target="_new">delay some critical updates</a>, knowing that cutting off communications from Iran just as so many people are relying on it would be a disaster.  While this does highlight a separate problem -- about the fact that as Twitter becomes a critical communication channel for some, the fact that it is a "single point of failure" is worrisome.  It's definitely something that will need to be addressed at some point.<br /><br /><a href="http://www.techdirt.com/articles/20090615/1840295244.shtml">Permalink</a> | <a href="http://www.techdirt.com/articles/20090615/1840295244.shtml#comments">Comments</a> | <a href="http://www.techdirt.com/articles/20090615/1840295244.shtml?op=sharethis">Email This Story</a><br />
 ]]></description>
<slash:department>the-power-of-twitter</slash:department>
<wfw:commentRss>http://www.techdirt.com/comment_rss.php?sid=20090615/1840295244</wfw:commentRss>
</item>
<item>
<pubDate>Wed, 27 May 2009 22:39:00 PDT</pubDate>
<title>Honolulu Completes Internet/Telephone-Only Election</title>
<dc:creator>Mike Masnick</dc:creator>
<link>http://www.techdirt.com/articles/20090527/0359125027.shtml</link>
<guid>http://www.techdirt.com/articles/20090527/0359125027.shtml</guid>
<description><![CDATA[ A few folks have submitted various versions of the news that Honolulu has <a href="http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20090523/ap_on_re_us/us_web_voting_1" target="_new">concluded a city election of council members using only internet or telephone voting</a>.  Similar systems have been tried elsewhere, but for the most part, there's been fear to use them more widely in the US, over worries about hacking.  Of course, at a time when we still can't even get basic stand-alone e-voting machines to work properly, I think there's still plenty to be worried about before jumping ahead to internet voting.  There is a note at the end of the article, saying that the company that provided the technology, called Everyone Counts, says that the code for the systems used in the election are available for auditing.  However, a quick glance of the company's <a href="http://www.everyonecounts.com/">website</a> doesn't seem to reveal any code.  So unless I'm missing something (in which case, please let us know in the comments!), it sounds like the code isn't open, but only available for auditing by a limited group of folks... just like traditional (buggy, problematic) e-voting systems.  <b>Update</b>: And already there are questions about the election.  Despite part of the reason for internet voting being that it would get more people involved a tiny <a href="http://hosted.ap.org/dynamic/stories/U/US_WEB_VOTING?SITE=CADIU&SECTION=HOME&TEMPLATE=DEFAULT" target="_new">6.3% of the electorate participated</a> raising numerous questions about why... and if the technology miscounted.  If people don't trust the technology, they're not going to trust the results either...<br /><br /><a href="http://www.techdirt.com/articles/20090527/0359125027.shtml">Permalink</a> | <a href="http://www.techdirt.com/articles/20090527/0359125027.shtml#comments">Comments</a> | <a href="http://www.techdirt.com/articles/20090527/0359125027.shtml?op=sharethis">Email This Story</a><br />
 ]]></description>
<slash:department>how-open-was-it?</slash:department>
<wfw:commentRss>http://www.techdirt.com/comment_rss.php?sid=20090527/0359125027</wfw:commentRss>
</item>
<item>
<pubDate>Tue, 22 Jan 2008 07:05:00 PST</pubDate>
<title>Did Slate Violate Copyright Law?</title>
<dc:creator>Timothy Lee</dc:creator>
<link>http://www.techdirt.com/articles/20080120/07363714.shtml</link>
<guid>http://www.techdirt.com/articles/20080120/07363714.shtml</guid>
<description><![CDATA[ Slate has a <a href="http://link.brightcove.com/services/link/bcpid271557392/bctid1377935786">clever video</a> comparing Hillary Clinton to Tracy Flick of the movie <i>Election</i>:
<center>
<embed src="http://services.brightcove.com/services/viewer/federated_f8/271557392" bgcolor="#FFFFFF" flashVars="videoId=1377935786&#038;playerId=271557392&#038;viewerSecureGatewayURL=https://services.brightcove.com/services/amfgateway&#038;servicesURL=http://services.brightcove.com/services&#038;cdnURL=http://admin.brightcove.com&#038;domain=embed&#038;autoStart=false&#038;" base="http://admin.brightcove.com" name="flashObj" width="486" height="412" seamlesstabbing="false" type="application/x-shockwave-flash" swLiveConnect="true" pluginspage="http://www.macromedia.com/shockwave/download/index.cgi?P1_Prod_Version=ShockwaveFlash"></embed>
</center>
This isn't a blog about politics, so I won't venture an opinion on whether this is fair to Sen. Clinton or not, but the video has sparked some interesting discussion about copyright law. First, Cynthia Brumfield <a href="http://www.ipdemocracy.com/archives/002848tim_wu_on_intellectual_property_internet_filtering.php">points out</a> that this is precisely the kind of video that Hollywood (specifically, <a href="http://bits.blogs.nytimes.com/2008/01/16/830/">NBC's Rick Cotton</a>) would disallow under the fair use doctrine. Cotton argues that "the assembly of unchanged copies of different copyrighted works" shouldn't counted as fair use, but that there should be "something more" to qualify. This is quite vague, but it seems pretty likely that the above video, which is basically just 45 seconds of movie footage interspersed with footage of Sens. Clinton and Obama, wouldn't qualify under his test. But Chris Soghoian points out an even more obvious way that Slate may have <a href="http://www.cnet.com/8301-13739_1-9854309-46.html?part=rss&#038;tag=feed&#038;subj=SurveillanceState">broken the law</a>: the most likely source of the video clips in question would likely be from a DVD. As Soghoian points out, the video is too crisp and clear to have come from a VHS tape. It's conceivable that it was taped from a cable TV broadcast, but I think he's right that the most obvious source would likely have been a DVD. If that's the case, then the video editor in question almost certainly broke the law, because DVD-ripping tools like <a href="http://handbrake.fr/">Handbrake</a> are illegal "circumvention devices" under the DMCA. Of course, it's not likely <i>Election</i> distributor Paramount will actually sue <i>Slate</i>, which is owned by the influential Washington Post Company. But I think it illustrates the extent to which the letter of the law is diverging from everyday practice. In a sane world, there would be no question that videos like this one would be legal. But in the world we actually live in, no one is sure what the law is, and people developing these kinds of creative works need to be constantly worrying about possible legal problems.<br /><br /><a href="http://www.techdirt.com/articles/20080120/07363714.shtml">Permalink</a> | <a href="http://www.techdirt.com/articles/20080120/07363714.shtml#comments">Comments</a> | <a href="http://www.techdirt.com/articles/20080120/07363714.shtml?op=sharethis">Email This Story</a><br />
 ]]></description>
<slash:department>nobody-knows</slash:department>
<wfw:commentRss>http://www.techdirt.com/comment_rss.php?sid=20080120/07363714</wfw:commentRss>
</item>
</channel>
</rss>