[free-sklyarov] Time of Adobe/EFF meeting?

[proclus at iname.com]

As a strong supporter of the protests and boycott, I would like to
throw my voice behind Julian's.  I will add that in Will's shoes, I
would have done precisely what the EFF has done.  You may disagree with
some of their decisions in this matter, as I do, but _think_.  Everyone
of us on this list could find something to disagree about, but it is
what brought us together that is important.  We can tolerate our
differences, and we can still work together.  Now, let's get back to
the business of FREEING Dmitry, each of us contributing what we can in
our own way.

Regards,
proclus
http://www.gnu-darwin.org/

On 23 Jul, Julian T. J. Midgley wrote:
>> On Sun, 22 Jul 2001, Will Doherty wrote:
> 
>> Hey Paul,
>> My take on our conversation was that it consisted of
>> a lot more than just "Trust me".
>>
>> If anyone else would like to chat, I am available,
>> as many of you already know since I'm pretty sure
>> I've spoken and/or emailed with dozens of you at
>> this point.
> 
> As an independent observer, with no affiliation to the EFF other than that
> I have made the odd donation in the past, it seems to me that there is
> altogether too much paranoia surrounding the recent discussions of their
> actions.
> 
> It does the movement no great harm for the EFF to agree to ask for the
> protests to be delayed in order to be allowed to hold a meeting with
> Adobe.  As we have seen, they have publically requested a delay (thus
> sticking to their end of the bargain), without this actually having
> significant effect on the demonstrations themselves.  If this is what is
> necessary in order to be able to sit down at a table with Adobe then it
> (the request, unheeded, for a delay) is a small price to pay for the
> opportunity to engage in negotiations which may assist in freeing Dmitry.
> 
> As regards the 'secrecy' surrounding their communications with Adobe, I
> don't believe we have any reason to be afraid that the EFF have suddenly
> caved in and joined with the enemy (or anything like that).  We have
> plenty of evidence that the EFF believe strongly in the cause they are
> fighting, and they are quite clearly one of the most effective weapons in
> the fight against the DMCA.  Their past actions make this abundantly
> clear.
> 
> It would not be in the EFF's interests to agree to any form of gagging
> order, but if Adobe were to say, at the end of the meeting, "we can at
> this stage make only a statement to a certain limited effect, but after
> the meeting we will hold further internal discussions with the aim of
> being able to do X on such and such a date, and we would prefer it if you
> didn't mention X until that date", then the EFF might reasonably, as a
> matter of good faith, not mention X until the date concerned (when they
> would be free to mention it regardless of whether Adobe actually got round
> to doing it or not).
> 
> Negotiations can be a delicate business, and their smooth progress is not
> always best assured by immediate public disclosure of everything that has
> been said.
> 
> If you can find any evidence that the EFF has caved in to unreasonable
> corporate demands in the past, or ever given up the causes they set out to
> fight for, then you might have reason to doubt their motives now.
> 
> I have every confidence that the EFF will do what is right, and look
> forward to hearing the results of the meeting later today.
> 
> Julian Midgley
> 

-- 
Visit proclus realm! http://www.proclus-realm.com/
-----BEGIN GEEK CODE BLOCK-----
Version: 3.1
GMU/S d+@ s: a+ C++++ UBULI++++$ P+ L+++(++++) E--- W++ N- !o K- w--- !O
M++@ V-- PS+++ PE Y+ PGP-- t+++(+) 5+++ X+ R tv-(--)@ b !DI D- G e++++
h--- r+++ y++++
------END GEEK CODE BLOCK------