—————Show me one conservative group defending even half of what the EFF defends on the side of freedom and privacy.—————
You’re looking at this the wrong way. I originally brought up heritage and other conservative groups in a different context. Soros doesn’t fund them. There’s obvious reasons why he doesn’t fund them.
—————Where s the conservative opposition to the DMCA?——————
That’s a good question. For the most part, I don’t see much now about it. Didn’t see much then about it either. A lot of that I’d bet has to do with how it was sold. IIRC, it was sold on the basis of property rights. That is, the content creator’s property. Conservatives are generally in favor of property rights.
The same thing could be said for Joe Biden’s patriot act. But the fact that the patriot act was written by Biden was lost. Instead, the PA has always been sold as a national defense issue. So most conservatives support it despite it’s origin, most conservatives don’t know it’s origin.
-————Where were the conservative constitutionalists when Congress was taking copyright far out of its constitutional mandate?-—————
Give me a date, more specifics. There have been several republican congress’ over the years, but very few conservative congress’.
-—————You seem to think it is.——————
Well, that’s my fault. I apologize. Net Neutrality isn’t the government’s only assault on the internet. It’s just the one with the best name.(easiest to sell; propagandize) It’s the one with the most momentum, probably. Making it the biggest target. And, despite a court telling them no, despite congress telling them no, the FCC emperors did it anyways. And also, it’s been sold to people for so long as one thing, and now we’re learning that that’s not what it is. The old net neutrality that we were all sold on, that I was sold on, I support that. But I’ve come to realize that it doesn’t exist. It never did.
—————No matter what the issue, no matter how unrelated to net neutrality, you try to paint it as a net neutrality issue. Yes, you have done this, several times.-——————
Some of them. Sure, I’ve done that. Some of it has to do with Free Press rabblerousing. Go back and look. Another big aspect of it has to do with silencing people in the modern era. Those in government are going to have to put all these things in place separately, then fuse them at the end so that most won’t realize what’s happened until it’s too late.
They’ve already done this, with some aspects of Obamacare. I’m not making it up, look at the games they’ve played regarding the funding.
So since none of them are fighting for our rights, representing the people against the corrupt powers, then nobody's supposed to do it?
That is, the content creator’s property. Conservatives are generally in favor of property rights.
"Property" rights (actually, only a government-granted limited monopoly) of the few, when they infringe on the freedom of the citizens. Nope, there was nothing except from groups like the EFF.
Unfortunately, conservatism to many means simple blind obedience to corporate interest, as if that always aligned with our interests and our rights.
Give me a date, more specifics. There have been several republican congress’ over the years, but very few conservative congress’.
I'm talking in general, not just the bought-off congresscritters. Let's take the 1998 CTEA, bought and paid for by industry, passed by Congress, signed by Clinton and approved by the Supreme court. Yet it takes copyright far beyond the constitutional mandate for it. DMCA, biggest killer of free speech in a while, crickets from the conservative organizations. The likes of the EFF fought hard against it. Heritage? Anyone?
Sure, I’ve done that. Some of it has to do with Free Press rabblerousing.
FP covers many issues besides net neutrality, so does the EFF. But whenever they say anything, you equate it with net neutrality.