That seems like be a lot of harsh claims and little to back them up.
It's easy to see how you could argue that this is exactly the EFF's core mission, the link from software patents to digital rights is hardly ephemeral, and the EFF has a history with the (since expired, the system works!) GIF patent. I think that an opponent argument is conceivable, but you haven't made it.
And why would you form a single-issue political group, when you could join ranks with a sympathetic existing political organization, which brings enormous resources, relationships and standing to the table?
The EFF is supposed to be about protecting digital rights. Do you believe that either Apple or Samsung is violating the civil rights of the other?
I could see taking on a case on behalf of someone who is a victim of another abusing the system say by an NPE troll. Wading into legal reform and becoming a lobbyist organization is another matter entirely in my mind.
Generally speaking from the evidence we see around us on a daily basis, the EFF is failing to hold the line in its mission as it is. They have no easy task. I don't really see how biting off yet even more than you can chew and becoming further diluted helps. Should the ACLU be active in environmental causes? We can agree to disagree about how best to achieve political reform and maintain credibility. There are indeed many ways to skin a cat.
First of all, "civil rights" means (in the US context) a particular set of issues, which aren't actually the core ones defended by EFF or the ACLU, although they sometimes overlap. I think you mean civil liberties.
Second, EFF has been working on intellectual property reform since its founding. It's long argued that antiquated or misapplied ideas of how IP should be enforced are actually a free expression issue, since (among other ideas) code is speech. It's actually one of the core principles at the basis of mapping traditional civil liberties onto the digital realm, which is at least some of the (looser) ideas behind "digital rights". Patent reform is part of that. It's not just about Samsung and Apple, it's about people being able to express themselves -- in free software, or the application of algorithms, in a digital world.
Comments
That seems like be a lot of harsh claims and little to back them up.
It's easy to see how you could argue that this is exactly the EFF's core mission, the link from software patents to digital rights is hardly ephemeral, and the EFF has a history with the (since expired, the system works!) GIF patent. I think that an opponent argument is conceivable, but you haven't made it.
And why would you form a single-issue political group, when you could join ranks with a sympathetic existing political organization, which brings enormous resources, relationships and standing to the table?
The EFF is supposed to be about protecting digital rights. Do you believe that either Apple or Samsung is violating the civil rights of the other?
I could see taking on a case on behalf of someone who is a victim of another abusing the system say by an NPE troll. Wading into legal reform and becoming a lobbyist organization is another matter entirely in my mind.
Generally speaking from the evidence we see around us on a daily basis, the EFF is failing to hold the line in its mission as it is. They have no easy task. I don't really see how biting off yet even more than you can chew and becoming further diluted helps. Should the ACLU be active in environmental causes? We can agree to disagree about how best to achieve political reform and maintain credibility. There are indeed many ways to skin a cat.
First of all, "civil rights" means (in the US context) a particular set of issues, which aren't actually the core ones defended by EFF or the ACLU, although they sometimes overlap. I think you mean civil liberties.
Second, EFF has been working on intellectual property reform since its founding. It's long argued that antiquated or misapplied ideas of how IP should be enforced are actually a free expression issue, since (among other ideas) code is speech. It's actually one of the core principles at the basis of mapping traditional civil liberties onto the digital realm, which is at least some of the (looser) ideas behind "digital rights". Patent reform is part of that. It's not just about Samsung and Apple, it's about people being able to express themselves -- in free software, or the application of algorithms, in a digital world.