in Communication Ethics
"The Electronic Frontier Foundation has filed a brief in federal court in support of companies that offer software to edit violence or sex from a user's DVD. The full story can be found in this article from the Salt Lake Tribune."
I knew this would happen sooner or later; it's been obvious to me for a while that the EFF isn't really as certain as it thinks it is about what it stands for, rather then against.
This issue was clearly decided by the EFF by the following logic: Which side are the Big Corporations on? Take the other side. which is not an effective agenda for them. (modified June 23, 2003)
In reality, this is censorship, and by supporting this form of censorship, they open the door to a whole lot of bad things, which will be discussed in what is currently chapter 8 of my essay. I'd like to bump it to the front of the queue because it's topical now, but unfortunately it heavily depends on preceding material, including the chapter I hope to publish tonight and the one following it.
So I guess this boils down to a hand-waving argument, but I wanted to mention this. One of my explicit goals for my essay is the hope the EFF can use it to help them refine what it is they really stand for, because up to this point they've really been a haphazard, reactionary group, always on the defensive and always fighting against things, rather then a proactive group supporting things, and I think in many ways this contributes to the way the organization does not seem to amount to much.