On December 21, 2018, a Wisconsin state trial court issued an opinion in Election Systems & Software v Wisconsin Elections Commission, Dane Co., 18-cv-972. The issue was what the Wisconsin Elections Commission should have agreed to, relative to Jill Stein’s request to examine the ES&S software used to count votes in Wisconsin. Wisconsin is one of the three states in which Stein had requested a recount of the November 2016 presidential vote.
The Wisconsin Elections Commission prepared a contract with the Stein campaign, letting the campaign’s experts examine the software, if they promised not to disclose it. That contract was prepared in March 2018. Then ES&S sued to force the Elections Commission to revise the contract, so that it prohibited Stein’s experts from criticizing the software. But the Court said the Elections Commission is under no obligation to do that.
The court made this analogy: “A nutritionist might be given access to the secret formula for Coca Cola, which is undeniably proprietary information and a trade secret. It would not be an unauthorized use or a disclosure of the trade secret for the nutritionist to say, “After seeing the secret formula, I can tell you that Coca Cola is unhealthy.”