More seriously, EFF is presently defending Democratic Underground against RightHaven, and hopefully will put a nail in the copyright trolling industry. FreeRepublic chose to settle rather than ensure that fair use is still considered fair use.
EFF has also defended CAIR and other organizations which I have absolutely no like for, but each of those cases was chosen to specifically protect a right we have that others are trying to take away from us.
Like the sale of promo CDs - hey, some may think those CDs are the property of the studios - but do you want to have to pay Ford more to have the right to sell your car? Without the principle of first sale, you will no longer be able to resell anything. Any book publisher could toss in something forbidding lending at a library or selling at a used book store, any car company could forbid resale without permission, to require expensive ‘recertification’ of used cars.
At the time, EFF got two unsolicited donations, which were used for a singular project, then they moved on. On a typical year, the EFF runs in the red, drawing upon their nest egg to continue operations for a specific reason: they don't want anyone controlling the agenda.
While I agree with the need to worry about ‘net neutrality’ being a cover to silence free speech, the one group I'm going to give the most credit to for ensuring my freedom of speech is protected online is the EFF. Not about to toss the baby out with the bath water.
-—————Being that EFF ditched the Soros snake three years ago——————
Did they now?
On what basis do you make this claim?