[12830] in Commercialization & Privatization of the Internet
EFF Platform
daemon@ATHENA.MIT.EDU (Ira Brodsky (via RadioMail))
Mon May 30 17:36:29 1994
Date: Mon, 30 May 1994 07:49:34 PDT
From: Ira Brodsky (via RadioMail) <brodsky@radiomail.net>
Cc: com-priv@psi.com
To: mech@eff.org
Stanton,
I have read and reread the Electronic Frontier Foundation's
Open Platform 2.0. There are two things I find disturbing about
this document and your defense of it.
First, the Open Platform lists among its objectives "Free Speech"
and "Privacy" on one hand, and "Diversity of Information Sources",
"Universal Service", and "Development of Public Interest
Applications and Services" on the other. The EFF is advocating
mutually exclusive causes: a new social contract "to achieve the
democratic potential of the growing information superhighway..."
AND individual rights.
You can't tell Cable TV operators what programming to offer,
force carriers to provide service to rural customers below
actual cost, or single out certain applications or services for
preferential treatment without abrogating individual rights.
Somewhere along the line, the EFF has decided that its social
engineering agenda takes precedence over individual freedom.
To paraphrase John Adams, the acid test
for individual rights is whether they
are applied to the RICH as well as
the poor.
Second, you repeatedly assert that regulation is undesirable,
but that it is a fact of life, and recognizing this fact, the EFF has
made the decision to influence rather than oppose regulation.
This is a cynical view that can only lead to bad consequences.
The EFF has positioned itself as the defender of free speech and
privacy--while clearly advocating government intrusion in an
emerging industry. I must assume you sincerely believe there is
no contradiction. But there is--and it needs to be exposed.
We wouldn't want all those disillusioned EFF members simply retiring to the sidelines. <g>
Ira Brodsky
