Regarding the software quality of a competitor

From: Duke Winsor <duke_at_winsor_dot_com>
Date: Wed Apr 21 2004 - 13:42:18 CDT

This is from the Politech mailing list. It refers to an Oakland Tribune
article that documents the legal troubles of a company that allegedly
did not subject its software to "certification."

>Subject: [Politech] Diebold knew of legal risks of its voting machines [priv]
>
>-------- Original Message --------
>Subject: DIEBOLD knew of legal risks
>Date: Tue, 20 Apr 2004 12:00:28 -0700 (PDT)
>From: Joseph Lorenzo Hall <jhall@sims.berkeley.edu>
>Reply-To: joehall@pobox.com
>To: Dave Farber <dave@farber.net>, Declan McCullagh <declan@well.com>
>
>
>Big development in the Diebold affair.... here in CA.
>
>DIEBOLD knew of legal risks
>Oakland Tribune - Oakland,CA,USA
>By Ian Hoffman, STAFF WRITER. Attorneys for Diebold Election Systems
>Inc. warned in late November that its use of uncertified vote ...
><http://www.oaklandtribune.com/Stories/0,1413,82~1865~2095811,00.html>
>
>------------------------------------------------------------------------
>Joseph Lorenzo Hall, SIMS PhD Student; UC Berkeley.
>[web:<http://pobox.com/~joehall/>, blog:<http://pobox.com/~joehall/nqb>]
>
>
>_______________________________________________
>Politech mailing list
>Archived at http://www.politechbot.com/
>Moderated by Declan McCullagh (http://www.mccullagh.org/)
==================================================================
= The content of this message, with the exception of any external
= quotations under fair use, are released to the Public Domain
==================================================================
Received on Fri Apr 30 23:17:14 2004

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.8 : Fri Apr 30 2004 - 23:17:29 CDT