On a website devoted to copyright articles and lawsuits, I found that "A Federal District Court judge ruled in favor of the ISP and students while granting summary judgment on the claim that Diebold violated 512(f) of the Digital Millennium Copyright Act (DMCA) by sending takedown notices while knowing that infringement has not actually occured." I was surprised that the students actually won their lawsuit, because before hearing this, I thought that the law would have made them liable for what they did. Although I don't agree with it, the way the law is written, it is almost like they were in possession of stolen property. The law says that anyone in possession of stolen property can be prosecuted. I saw a parallel in the intellectual property law as well as in physical stolen property law. Apparently in the judge's view, they did not break any laws. I find this ruling to be a victory for those of us who believe that information of this kind should be made public. This whistle blowing could have shown a flaw in our voting system, which could mean that the wrong man was put into the white house.