EFF in the News
Likewise, Seth Schoen, senior staff technologist at the Electronic Frontier Foundation, noted, "I think there's an interesting irony" given the news the FBI is planning "to force technology developers to build backdoors in their security systems. . . . Law enforcement's desires for backdoors in communications infrastructure could easily come in direct conflict with the government's desire to strengthen computer security."
"You always have to be careful with metaphors," said Cindy Cohn, legal director for the Electronic Frontier Foundation. "Metaphors can lead to really bad policy. That doesn't mean what Microsoft is proposing is bad. But the point here is to think hard about what it would mean."
The Electronic Frontier Foundation, which dubbed Leahy's bill, "censorship," called the inability to get it passed, a "victory."
EFF, however, recognizes that supporters of the bill will most likely try again.
"Make no mistake," EFF wrote on its site, "this bill will be back soon enough, and Congress will again need to hear from concerned citizens."
The EFF and the Apache Software Foundation support Microsoft's argument in favor of lowering the standard because they believe that the current standard is excessive and unfairly disadvantages open source software projects that don't have the resources to fight back against costly patent litigation. Adopting the "preponderance" standard would make patent invalidation consistent with other similar facets of civil law.
Peter Eckersley, senior staff technologist with the Electronic Frontier Foundation, was unimpressed with the latest version. "Let me put it this way: They have taken a mind-bogglingly bad idea and have merely made it an extremely bad idea," he said.
Kurt Opsahl of the Electronic Frontier Foundation noted that “citizens are directly impacted by Internet intermediary liability and obligations because of the diversity of information and opinion online is hosted and transited by intermediaries.”
A San Francisco firm that defends free speech on the Web is taking on a Las Vegas company that has filed more than 140 copyright lawsuits this year.
Electronic Frontier Foundation filed a counterclaim this week that calls Righthaven LLC's ongoing copyright battle a sham shakedown operation
These amici argue that plaintiffs often insist that defendants can't prove their patents are invalid unless they get source code that demonstrates invalidity precisely; yet that source code is often unavailable. In this case, i4i argued, and both lower courts agreed—that because of the high "clear and convincing" standard, Microsoft couldn't prove invalidity without the source code of the relevant prior art, which was an earlier i4i product. The problems Microsoft faced in trying to dis-prove the patented i4i invention "are both common and pernicious" in litigation, writes the EFF.
Now the Redmond firm has managed to get briefs filed by the likes of Apple, Google, Dell, HP, Toyota and even Wal-Mart to support its effort. Perhaps surprisingly, the Electronic Frontier Foundation (EFF) and the Apache Foundation have also publicly supported Microsoft's efforts.
Righthaven, the Las Vegas-based copyright troll, may have sued one website too many. The Electronic Frontier Foundation hit the company with a lawsuit Monday alleging Righthaven is abusing copyright law by suing for excerpting or posting newspaper articles without permission.