Skip to main content

EFF Press Release Archives

EFF Press Release Archives

Press Releases: August 2016

August 12, 2016

Copyright Holders Must Be Held Accountable For Baseless Takedown Notices

Washington, D.C.—The Electronic Frontier Foundation (EFF) today filed a petition on behalf of its client Stephanie Lenz asking the U.S. Supreme Court to ensure that copyright holders who make unreasonable infringement claims can be held accountable if those claims force lawful speech offline.

Lenz filed the lawsuit that came to be known as the “Dancing Baby” case after she posted—back in 2007—a short video on YouTube of her toddler son in her kitchen. The 29-second recording, which Lenz wanted to share with family and friends, shows her son bouncing along to the Prince song "Let's Go Crazy," which is heard playing in the background. Universal Music Group, which owns the copyright to the Prince song, sent YouTube a notice under the Digital Millennium Copyright Act (DMCA), claiming that the family video was an infringement of the copyright.

EFF sued Universal on Lenz’s behalf, arguing that the company’s claim of infringement didn’t pass the laugh test and was just the kind of improper, abusive DMCA targeting of lawful material that so often threatens free expression on the Internet. The DMCA includes provisions designed to prevent abuse of the takedown process and allows people like Lenz to sue copyright holders for bogus takedowns.

The San Francisco-based U.S. Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit last year sided in part with Lenz, ruling that that copyright holders must consider fair use before sending a takedown notice. But the court also held that copyright holders should be held to a purely subjective standard. In other words, senders of false infringement notices could be excused so long as they subjectively believed that the material they targeted was infringing, no matter how unreasonable that belief. Lenz is asking the Supreme Court to overrule that part of the Ninth Circuit’s decision to ensure that the DMCA provides the protections for fair use that Congress intended.

“Rightsholders who force down videos and other online content for alleged infringement—based on nothing more than an unreasonable hunch, or subjective criteria they simply made up—must be held accountable,” said EFF Legal Director Corynne McSherry. “If left standing, the Ninth Circuit’s ruling gives fair users little real protection against private censorship through abuse of the DMCA process.”

For the brief:

For more on Lenz v. Universal:

Related Issues:


Legal Director
August 9, 2016

Ceremony for Honorees on September 21 in San Francisco

San Francisco - The Electronic Frontier Foundation (EFF) is pleased to announce the distinguished winners of the 2016 Pioneer Awards: Malkia Cyril of the Center for Media Justice, data protection activist Max Schrems, the authors of the “Keys Under Doormats” report that counters calls to break encryption, and the lawmakers behind CalECPA—a groundbreaking computer privacy law for Californians.

The award ceremony will be held the evening of September 21 at Delancey Street’s Town Hall Room in San Francisco. The keynote speaker is award-winning investigative journalist Julia Angwin, whose work on corporate invasions of privacy has uncovered the myriad ways companies collect and control personal information. Her recent articles have sought to hold algorithms accountable for the important decisions they make about our lives. Tickets are $65 for current EFF members, or $75 for non-members.  

Malkia A. Cyril is the founder and executive director of the Center for Media Justice and co-founder of the Media Action Grassroots Network, a national network of community-based organizations working to ensure racial and economic justice in a digital age. Cyril is one of few leaders of color in the movement for digital rights and freedom, and a leader in the Black Lives Matter Network—helping to bring important technical safeguards and surveillance countermeasures to people across the country who are fighting to reform systemic racism and violence in law enforcement. Cyril is also a prolific writer and public speaker on issues ranging from net neutrality to the communication rights of prisoners. Their comments have been featured in publications like Politico, Motherboard, and Essence Magazine, as well as three documentary films. Cyril is a Prime Movers fellow, a recipient of the 2012 Donald H. McGannon Award for work to advance the roles of women and people of color in the media reform movement, and won the 2015 Hugh Hefner 1st Amendment Award for framing net neutrality as a civil rights issue.

Max Schrems is a data protection activist, lawyer, and author whose lawsuits over U.S. companies’ handling of European Union citizens’ personal information have changed the face of international data privacy. Since 2011 he has worked on the enforcement of EU data protection law, arguing that untargeted wholesale spying by the U.S. government on Internet communications undermines the EU’s strict data protection standards. One lawsuit that reached the European Court of Justice led to the invalidation of the “Safe Harbor” agreement between the U.S. and the EU, forcing governments around the world to grapple with the conflict between U.S. government surveillance practices and the privacy rights of citizens around the world. Another legal challenge is a class action lawsuit with more than 25,000 members currently pending at the Austrian Supreme Court. Schrems is also the founder of “Europe v Facebook,” a group that pushes for social media privacy reform at Facebook and other companies, calling for data collection minimization, opt-in policies instead of opt-outs, and transparency in data collection.

The “Keys Under Doormats” report has been central to grounding the current encryption debates in scientific realities. Published in July of 2015, it emerged just as calls to break encryption with “backdoors” or other access points for law enforcement were becoming pervasive in Congress, but before the issue came into the global spotlight with the FBI’s efforts against Apple earlier this year. “Keys Under Doormats” both reviews the underlying technical considerations of the earlier encryption debate of the 1990s and examines the modern systems realities, creating a compelling, comprehensive, and scientifically grounded argument to protect and extend the availability of encrypted digital information and communications. The authors of the report are all security experts, building the case that weakening encryption for surveillance purposes could never allow for any truly secure digital transactions. The “Keys Under Doormats” authors are Harold Abelson, Ross Anderson, Steven M. Bellovin, Josh Benaloh, Matt Blaze, Whitfield Diffie, John Gilmore, Matthew Green, Susan Landau, Peter G. Neumann, Ronald L. Rivest, Jeffrey I. Schiller, Bruce Schneier, Michael Specter, and Daniel J. Weitzner. Work on the report was coordinated by the MIT Internet Policy Research Initiative.

CalECPA—the California Electronic Communications Privacy Act—is a landmark law that safeguards privacy and free speech rights. CalECPA requires that a California government entity gets a warrant to search electronic devices or compel access to any electronic information, like email, text messages, documents, metadata, and location information—whether stored on the electronic device itself or online in the “cloud.” CalECPA gave California the strongest digital privacy law in the nation and helps prevent abuses before they happen. In many states without this protection, police routinely claim the authority to search sensitive electronic information about who we are, where we go, and what we do—without a warrant. CalECPA was introduced by California State Senators Mark Leno (D-San Francisco) and Joel Anderson (R-Alpine), who both fought for years to get stronger digital privacy protections for Californians. Leno has been a champion of improved transportation, renewable energy, and equal rights for all, among many other issues. Anderson regularly works across party lines to protect consumer privacy in the digital world.

“We are honored to announce this year’s Pioneer Award winners, and to celebrate the work they have done to make communications private, safe, and secure,” said EFF Executive Director Cindy Cohn. “The Internet is an unprecedented tool for everything from activism to research to commerce, but it will only stay that way if everyone can trust their technology and the systems it relies on. With this group of pioneers, we are building a digital future we can all be proud of.”

Awarded every year since 1992, EFF’s Pioneer Awards recognize the leaders who are extending freedom and innovation on the electronic frontier. Previous honorees have included Aaron Swartz, Citizen Lab, Richard Stallman, and Anita Borg.

Sponsors of the 2016 Pioneer Awards include Adobe, Airbnb, Dropbox, Facebook, and O’Reilly Media.

To buy tickets to the Pioneer Awards:


Media Relations Director and Digital Rights Analyst
August 5, 2016

Consumers Need Warning If Movies, Music, Games Restrict When and How They Are Used

San Francisco - The Electronic Frontier Foundation (EFF) and a coalition of consumer groups, content creators, and publishers asked the Federal Trade Commission (FTC) today to require online retailers to label the ebooks, songs, games, and apps that come with digital locks restricting how consumers can use them.
In a letter sent to the FTC today, the coalition said companies like Amazon, Google, and Apple have a duty to inform consumers if products for sale are locked with some kind of "digital rights management" or DRM. Companies use DRM to purportedly combat copyright infringement, but DRM locks can also block you from watching the movie you bought in New York when you go to Asia on vacation, or limit which devices can play the songs you purchased.
"Without DRM labeling, it’s nearly impossible to figure out which products have digital locks and what restrictions these locks impose," said EFF Special Advisor Cory Doctorow. "We know the public prefers DRM-free e-books and other electronic products, but right now buyers are in the dark about DRM locks when they go to make purchases online. Customers have a right to know about these restrictions before they part with their money, not after."
The letter is accompanied by a request that the FTC investigate and take action on behalf of consumers who find themselves deprived of the enjoyment of their property every day, due to a marketplace where products limited by DRM are sold without adequate notice. The request details the stories of 20 EFF supporters who bought products—ebooks, videos, games, music, devices, even a cat-litter box—that came with DRM that caused them grief. They report that DRM left them with broken, orphaned, or useless devices and in some cases even incapacitated other devices.
The FTC oversees fair packaging and labeling rules that are supposed to prevent consumers from being deceived and facilitate value comparisons. Today’s letter argues that the FTC should require electronic sellers to use a simple, consistent, and straightforward label about DRM locks for digital media. For example, "product detail" lists—which appear on digital product pages and disclose such basic information as serial number, file size, publisher, and whether certain technological features are enabled—should include a category stating whether a product is DRM-free or DRM-restricted. The latter designation should include a link to a clear explanation of the restrictions imposed on the product.
"The use of DRM is controversial among creators, studios, and audiences. What shouldn’t be controversial is the right of consumers to know which products have DRM locks. If car companies made vehicles that only drove on certain streets, they’d have to disclose this to consumers. Likewise, digital media products with DRM restrictions should be clearly labeled," said Doctorow.
Signers of today’s letter include the Consumer Federation of America, Public Knowledge, the Free Software Foundation, McSweeney’s, and No Starch Press.
For the full letter to the FTC about labeling:

For the full letter to the FTC with the stories of people who've been harmed by DRM they weren't informed of:


EFF Special Advisor
August 4, 2016

Editors Who Exposed Corruption, Political Opponents of Authoritarian Government’s President, and Their Legal Teams Were Sent Malware

San Francisco—Journalists and political activists critical of Kazakhstan’s authoritarian government, along with their family members, lawyers, and associates, have been targets of an online phishing and malware campaign believed to be carried out on behalf of the government of Kazakhstan, according to a new report by the Electronic Frontier Foundation (EFF).

Malware was sent to Irina Petrushova and Alexander Petrushov, publishers of the independent newspaper Respublika, which was forced by the government of Kazakhstan to stop printing after years of exposing corruption but has continued to operate online. Also targeted are family members and attorneys of Mukhtar Ablyazov, co-founder and leader of opposition party Democratic Choice of Kazakhstan, as well as other prominent dissidents.

The campaign—which EFF has called “Operation Manul,” after endangered wild cats found in the grasslands of Kazakhstan—involved sending victims spearphishing emails that tried to trick them into opening documents which would covertly install surveillance software capable of recording keystrokes, recording through the webcam, and more. Some of the software used in the campaign is commercially available to anyone and sells for as little as $40 online.

Spearphishing emails and malware sent to members of the Ablyazov family while they were in exile in Italy may have helped track the whereabouts of Mukhtar Ablyazov’s wife and young daughter.  Despite having legal European resident permits, the two were taken into custody in Italy in 2013 and forcibly deported to Kazakhastan. Many targets of the malware campaign are also involved in litigation with the government of Kazakhstan, including the publishers of Respublika noted above. EFF represented Respublika in a U.S. lawsuit during the course of which the government has attempted to censor the site and discover Respublika’s confidential sources

Kazakhstan is a former Soviet republic that heavily restricts freedom of speech and assembly, and where torture is a serious problem, according to Human Rights Watch. The republic was ranked 160 out of 180 countries tracked by Reporters Without Borders for attacks on journalistic freedom and independence.

“The use of malware to spy on and intimidate dissidents beyond their borders is an increasingly common tactic employed by oppressive governments,” said Eva Galperin, Global Policy Analyst at EFF and one of the report’s authors. “As we have seen in places like Syria and Vietnam, journalists and political opposition leaders are being attacked in both the physical and digital worlds. Regimes are turning to covertly installed malware to track, harass, and silence those who seek to expose corruption and inform the public about human rights abuses—especially targets that have moved beyond the regime's sphere of control. Based on available evidence, we believe this campaign is likely to have been carried out on behalf of the government of Kazakhstan.”

EFF researchers, along with technologists at First Look Media and Amnesty International, examined data about suspected espionage groups and found overlaps between Operation Manul and Appin Security Group, an Indian company that has been linked with several other attack campaigns.

“Appin has been linked by cybersecurity firm Norman Shark to cyber-attacks against a Norwegian telecom company, Punjabi separatists, and others," said EFF Staff Technologist Cooper Quintin. “We found that some of the technology infrastructure used in those cyber attacks overlapped with the infrastructure used in Operation Manul. “

“Our research shows that such cheap, commercially available malware can have a real impact on vulnerable populations,” said Galperin. “Much of the past research in this area has exposed campaigns carried out by governments using spy software which they have purchased. In this case, the evidence suggests that the government of Kazakhstan hired a company to carry out the attacks on their behalf.”

For the report:


Director of Cybersecurity

Staff Technologist
August 2, 2016

Thursday Hearing in EFF’s Case Against Patent That Threatened Podcasting

Washington, D.C.—The Electronic Frontier Foundation (EFF) will urge a federal appeals court at a hearing Thursday to find that the U.S. Patent and Trademark Office (USPTO) correctly invalidated key claims of a patent owned by Personal Audio, which had used the patent to threaten podcasters big and small.

EFF is defending a USPTO ruling it won last year in its petition challenging the validity of key claims of Personal Audio’s patent. EFF argued, and the USPTO agreed, that the claimed invention existed before Personal Audio filed its patent application.

Personal Audio maintained that it invented the process of updating a website regularly with new, related content creating a series of episodes—basically podcasting—in 1996. Personal Audio began sending letters to podcasters in 2013, demanding licensing fees from creators such as comedian Adam Carolla and three major television networks. In its challenge to the patent, EFF showed that putting a series of episodes online for everyone to enjoy was not a new idea when the patent application was filed.

Personal Audio asked the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Federal District in Washington D.C. to overturn the USPTO ruling. At a hearing on Thursday, EFF's pro bono counsel will ask the court to reject Personal Audio’s argument that the USPTO erred when it invalidated the patent claims.

What: Court hearing in Personal Audio LLC v. Electronic Frontier Foundation

When:  Thursday, August 4, 10 am

Where:  U.S. Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit
             Courtroom 401, Panel J
             717 Madison Place, N.W.              
             Washington, D.C.  20439

 For more on EFF’s Personal Audio challenge:


Senior Staff Attorney and Mark Cuban Chair to Eliminate Stupid Patents
November 25, 2002

Electronic Frontier Foundation Wins Jurisdiction Argument

San Francisco - The California Supreme Court today ruled that a Texas resident who published a software program on the Internet cannot be forced to stand trial in California.

The court found that Matthew Pavlovich, who republished an open source DVD-descrambling software program called DeCSS, will not have to defend a trade secret lawsuit simply because he knew that his publication could cause "general effects" on the motion picture and technology industries in California. The court laid out clear jurisdiction rules for claims arising from publishing information on the Internet.

The Pavlovich decision is one piece of a larger legal struggle over Internet publication of DeCSS by thousands of individuals in fall 1999. European open source developers created DeCSS so they could play their DVDs on Linux computers, among other uses. DVD CCA, the sole licensing entity for a DVD-scrambling technology called CSS, sued hundreds of named and unnamed individuals and entities in the case on December 27, 1999.

Allonn Levy, an attorney with San Jose's Hopkins and Carley, represented Pavlovich pro bono with help from the Electronic Frontier Foundation (EFF).

"Mr. Pavlovich had no connections with California whatsoever," noted EFF Legal Director Cindy Cohn. "This decision clearly puts to rest the notion that you can drag someone into California court simply because he should have known that a web publication could harm Hollywood."

The court noted that without reasonable rules for court jurisdiction in Internet cases, "plaintiffs connected to the auto industry could sue any defendant in Michigan, plaintiffs connected to the financial industry could sue any defendant in New York and plaintiffs connected to the potato industry could sue any defendant in Idaho."

The decision also impacts the numerous other defendants named or served in the legal struggle, all but one of whom are located outside California. The appeal of the preliminary injunction entered against the sole California resident named in the case, Andrew Bunner, is awaiting an argument date before the California Supreme Court.

DeCSS is free software that allows people to play DVDs without technological restrictions, such as region codes and forced watching of commercials imposed by movie studios.

Norwegian teenager Jon Johansen originally published DeCSS on the Internet in October 1999. Under pressure from Hollywood, he is still facing criminal prosecution in Norway.

January 15, 2002

Texas Internet Publisher Pavlovich Protests to California Supremes

San Francisco - Texas resident Matthew Pavlovich yesterday for a second time asked the California Supreme Court to reverse a lower court decision requiring him to defend a trade secret case in a California court. Pavlovich, who did not reside in or have any contact with California, has resisted being forced to defend the case in that state.

"Courts have uniformly held that simply publishing something on the Internet is not sufficient to hold jurisdiction worldwide," noted EFF Intellectual Property Attorney Robin Gross. "Without the proper application of constitutional safeguards, the Internet will become a liability minefield for users."

In December 1999, a movie industry association called the DVD Copy Control Association (DVD CCA) sued hundreds of individuals, including Indiana college student Pavlovich, for allegedly publishing DVD decoding software called DeCSS on websites that hosted various Linux-based open-source projects. The DVD CCA claims that Internet republishing of DeCSS on their websites constitutes a trade secret violation.

Pavlovich's appeal is similar to the major case on the trade secret issue, DVD CCA v. Bunner, where an appeals court has stayed the trade secret misappropriation issue pending the outcome of Pavlovich's jurisdictional motion.

The U.S. Constitution's due process clause limits a state court's ability to assert power over out-of-state defendants who have no connection with that state. The Pavlovich case has already gone to the California Supreme Court once before; the Court sent the matter back to the Appellate Court to explain why it believed Pavlovich could be required to come to California. The Appellate Court again held that Pavlovich is required to defend himself in California.

"The lower court's ruling means that a person would be subject to jurisdiction everywhere the Internet reaches," said Allonn Levy, who represents Pavlovich. "It means that movie industry moguls can drag web publishers from anywhere in the world to defend themselves here in California."

DeCSS is free software that allows people to play DVDs without technological restrictions, such as region codes, preferred by movie studios.

Norwegian teenager Jon Johansen originally published DeCSS on the Internet in October 1999. Norwegian prosecutors recently indicted Johansen more than two years after the DVD CCA urged them to do so.

August 8, 2001

On August 7th, the California Sixth Appellate District issued an opinion denying Matthew Pavlovich's motion to dismiss the case against him for lack of personal jurisdiction over him.

Pavlovich, who was a college student in Indiana and now lives in Texas, claims postings made to the LiVID mailing list, which he ran from his home computer should not subject him to defending himself in California. LiVID is an open source development team working to build a DVD player compatible with the Linux operating system that could compete with the movie studios' monopoly on DVD players. In January 2000, a California judge issued an injunction banning dozens of individuals, including Pavlovich, from publishing DeCSS computer code.

Today, the court held that because Pavlovich knew the movie business was in California, publishing information that might have an effect on its profits was a sufficient connection to find Pavlovich within the court's purview.

This ruling magnifies the ability of Hollywood or other businesses to successfully sue anyone in the world who publishes information on the Internet which the movie studios claim could hurt their profits. Pavlovich is considering an appeal of the order to the California Supreme Court on Constitutional Due Process grounds.

July 17, 1998


SAN FRANCISCO, CA -- The Electronic Frontier Foundation (EFF) today raised the level of honesty in crypto politics by revealing that the Data Encryption Standard (DES) is insecure. The U.S. government has long pressed industry to limit encryption to DES (and even weaker forms), without revealing how easy it is to crack. Continued adherence to this policy would put critical infrastructures at risk; society should choose a different course.

To prove the insecurity of DES, EFF built the first unclassified hardware for cracking messages encoded with it. On Wednesday of this week the EFF DES Cracker, which was built for less than $250,000, easily won RSA Laboratory's "DES Challenge II" contest and a $10,000 cash prize. It took the machine less than 3 days to complete the challenge, shattering the previous record of 39 days set by a massive network of tens of thousands of computers. The research results are fully documented in a book published this week by EFF and O'Reilly and Associates, entitled "Cracking DES: Secrets of Encryption Research, Wiretap Politics, and Chip Design."

"Producing a workable policy for encryption has proven a very hard political challenge. We believe that it will only be possible to craft good policies if all the players are honest with one another and the public," said John Gilmore, EFF co-founder and project leader. "When the government won't reveal relevant facts, the private sector must independently conduct the research and publish the results so that we can all see the social trade-offs involved in policy choices."

The nonprofit foundation designed and built the EFF DES Cracker to counter the claim made by U.S. government officials that governments cannot decrypt information when protected by DES, or that it would take multimillion-dollar networks of computers months to decrypt one message. "The government has used that claim to justify policies of weak encryption and 'key recovery,' which erode privacy and security in the digital age," said EFF Executive Director Barry Steinhardt. It is now time for an honest and fully informed debate, which we believe will lead to a reversal of these policies."

"EFF has proved what has been argued by scientists for twenty years, that DES can be cracked quickly and inexpensively," said Gilmore. "Now that the public knows, it will not be fooled into buying products that promise real privacy but only deliver DES. This will prevent manufacturers from buckling under government pressure to 'dumb down' their products, since such products will no longer sell." Steinhardt added, "If a small nonprofit can crack DES, your competitors can too. Five years from now some teenager may well build a DES Cracker as her high school science fair project."

The Data Encryption Standard, adopted as a federal standard in 1977 to protect unclassified communications and data, was designed by IBM and modified by the National Security Agency. It uses 56-bit keys, meaning a user must employ precisely the right combination of 56 1s and 0s to decode information correctly. DES accounted for more than $125 million annually in software and hardware sales, according to a 1993 article in "Federal Computer Week." Trusted Information Systems reported last December that DES can be found in 281 foreign and 466 domestic encryption products, which accounts for between a third and half of the market.

A DES cracker is a machine that can read information encrypted with DES by finding the key that was used to encrypt that data. DES crackers have been researched by scientists and speculated about in the popular literature on cryptography since the 1970s. The design of the EFF DES Cracker consists of an ordinary personal computer connected to a large array of custom chips. It took EFF less than one year to build and cost less than $250,000.

This week marks the first public test of the EFF DES Cracker, which won the latest DES-cracking speed competition sponsored by RSA Laboratories ( Two previous RSA challenges proved that massive collections of computers coordinated over the Internet could successfully crack DES. Beginning Monday morning, the EFF DES Cracker began searching for the correct answer to this latest challenge, the RSA DES Challenge II-2. In less than 3 days of searching, the EFF DES Cracker found the correct key. "We searched more than 88 billion keys every second, for 56 hours, before we found the right 56-bit key to decrypt the answer to the RSA challenge, which was 'It's time for those 128-, 192-, and 256-bit keys,'" said Gilmore.

Many of the world's top cryptographers agree that the EFF DES Cracker represents a fundamental breakthrough in how we evaluate computer security and the public policies that control its use. "With the advent of the EFF DES Cracker machine, the game changes forever," said Whitfield Diffie, Distinguished Engineer at Sun Microsystems and famed co-inventor of public key cryptography. "Vast Internet collaborations cannot be concealed and so they cannot be used to attack real, secret messages. The EFF DES Cracker shows that it is easy to build search engines that can."

"The news is not that a DES cracker can be built; we've known that for years," said Bruce Schneier, the President of Counterpane Systems. "The news is that it can be built cheaply using off-the-shelf technology and minimal engineering, even though the department of Justice and the FBI have been denying that this was possible." Matt Blaze, a cryptographer at AT&T Labs, agreed: "Today's announcement is significant because it unambiguously demonstrates that DES is vulnerable, even to attackers with relatively modest resources. The existence of the EFF DES Cracker proves that the threat of "brute force" DES key search is a reality. Although the cryptographic community has understood for years that DES keys are much too small, DES-based systems are still being designed and used today. Today's announcement should dissuade anyone from using DES."

EFF and O'Reilly and Associates have published a book about the EFF DES Cracker, "Cracking DES: Secrets of Encryption Research, Wiretap Politics, and Chip Design." The book contains the complete design details for the EFF DES Cracker chips, boards, and software. This provides other researchers with the necessary data to fully reproduce, validate, and/or improve on EFF's research, an important step in the scientific method. The book is only available on paper because U.S. export controls on encryption potentially make it a crime to publish such information on the Internet.

EFF has prepared a background document on the EFF DES Cracker, which includes the foreword by Whitfield Diffie to "Cracking DES." (See The book can be ordered for worldwide delivery from O'Reilly & Associates via the Web (, or phone (1 800 998 9938, or +1 707 829 0515.)

The Electronic Frontier Foundation is one of the leading civil liberties organizations devoted to ensuring that the Internet remains the world's first truly global vehicle for free speech, and that the privacy and security of all on-line communication is preserved. Founded in 1990 as a nonprofit, public interest organization, EFF is based in San Francisco, California. EFF maintains an extensive archive of information on encryption policy, privacy, and free speech at the EFF Web site (

JavaScript license information