This is a transparent hit piece, e.g. Berman endorsing CALEA is supposed to be evidence of EFF supporting it even though he was promptly removed over it and their stance is clearly against it:
Or it talks about their support for ISPs, but at the time these were the hundreds of small dial up ISPs that were each highly competitive small businesses with half dozen employees tying a modem bank to a T1 line, not the likes of Comcast and Verizon as we know them today. The EFF was consistently in favor of rules like local loop unbundling that would have prevented their monopolization of that market when it converted from dialup to broadband.
It just goes on like that, pointing to half truths and claiming them as evidence that the EFF is some kind of nefarious front.
The main claim seems to be that they should be lobbying against Google and Facebook on privacy, but that's just a policy disagreement. Privacy regulations -- most regulations -- cement incumbents. If you don't want Facebook forever then what you want is a decentralized social network, not federal utility regulation of Facebook.
https://www.eff.org/issues/calea
Or it talks about their support for ISPs, but at the time these were the hundreds of small dial up ISPs that were each highly competitive small businesses with half dozen employees tying a modem bank to a T1 line, not the likes of Comcast and Verizon as we know them today. The EFF was consistently in favor of rules like local loop unbundling that would have prevented their monopolization of that market when it converted from dialup to broadband.
It just goes on like that, pointing to half truths and claiming them as evidence that the EFF is some kind of nefarious front.
The main claim seems to be that they should be lobbying against Google and Facebook on privacy, but that's just a policy disagreement. Privacy regulations -- most regulations -- cement incumbents. If you don't want Facebook forever then what you want is a decentralized social network, not federal utility regulation of Facebook.