“[Diebold’s] claims were not going to prevail in court,” predicted John G. Palfrey ’94, executive director of the Berkman Center for Internet and Society at Harvard Law School.

Wendy M. Seltzer ’96, staff attorney for the Electronic Frontier Foundation, which is providing legal representation for the plaintiffs, said she would still like to see Fogel rule on their suit.

“We’d still like to have a judge saying that a posting like this is ‘fair use,’” said Seltzer, a former Crimson executive, referring to an exemption in U.S. copyright laws under which students have claimed the Diebold memoranda fall.

Derek A. Slater ’05, one of two Harvard students who posted the memoranda on their University websites, said the Diebold motion represents a victory for him and others who have challenged the company.

“The students called their bluff by posting the documents,” said Slater.

After Diebold sent a cease-and-desist order to Harvard, the University removed the memoranda from Slater’s website.

But the University general counsel’s office informed Slater last month that his actions would not count as a violation of network policies.

The other Harvard student who has posted the memoranda, A. Eleanor Luey ’04, said she was never contacted by Diebold or the University about the documents.

The Diebold motion follows a decision last month by the California Secretary of State which will require all electronic voting machines in the state to provide paper receipts by 2006.

Reveling in the wake of Diebold motion’s last week, Palfrey said he was proud of the students.

“Derek Slater and a number of other students put themselves in harm’s way for something they believed in,” he said.