The EFF is opposed to any effective enforcement and litigation of intellectual property law, which seeks a platform by which to advance its agenda.
The EFF’s arguments have been considered and rejected by courts nationwide, including within this District [citation needed – except the only one you provided — quoting a former RIAA lobbyist Beryl Howell, who should have removed herself from all copyright cases due to the obvious conflict of interests, but failed to do so]
The EFF is an anti-intellectual property group, which appears in the present action merely in order to obstruct or delay Plaintiff’s copyright infringement litigation. ["we don't want delays, we want a list of names to pass it to our goon Mark Lutz so he would start his extortion phone calls!"]
…the EFF’s proposed participation as amicus curiae is precisely the kind of “attempt[] to inject interest-group politics” into litigation…
The EFF’s crusade continues, despite their lack of success, not out of any concern for proper application of the law.
…the EFF is a group with a deep disdain for both intellectual property law and for the law generally… [wow, just wow]
The EFF Is a Radical Special-Interest Group Generally Opposed to Any Effective Or Efficient Enforcement of Intellectual Property Law
This mission is radical, quasi-anarchist, and intrinsically opposed to any effective enforcement of intellectual property rights.
…their history of advocating lawlessness on the Internet suggests that their purpose is not to help this Court administer justice, but to hinder and obstruct the process…
Further, the EFF alleges no direct interest in any litigation which [sic] might be affected by the outcome of the present case [what litigation, scumbags? You are not interested in litigation, only in extortion, it’s common knowledge already: stop pretending]
Posting Permissions
Reply With Quote
Bookmarks