Thread by @doctorow

This is now a daily occurrence. Wake up, discover which lie Crispin has been told and repeated in public, all the while dodging the substance of the critique of his organisation's support for mass internet surveillance and censorship.

https://twitter.com/crispinhunt/status/1041614865893412865

Who can forget the day he said that my (bestselling) first novel was a failure, and that my publisher thereafter rejected me? (All my novels are bestsellers, and my publisher just bought another one from me).

Or the day he found a hatchet-piece about seven-year-old blog post I'd written defending copyright, and tweeted that it was evidence that I didn't respect copyright?

Or this cack-handed untruth? No, Crispin. EFF is funded primarily by small-money individual donors and the odd foundation. We've also had some money come in from entrepreneurs who've made it big.

Sometimes we *sue* the big tech companies (and other big companies) and get whopping paydays when we trounce them. And some companies have charitable donation matching-programmes where they match the sums given to any registered charity.

The more interesting question is: "Who is feeding you this rubbish, and why?" It's possible, I suppose, that you have a really inept oppo researcher. But it's more likely that you're being manipulated in the time-honoured tradition of entertainment companies using artists' groups

(I will never forget when I was fighting the Broadcast Treaty at WIPO - allied with the International Music Managers' Federation, BTW - and I was being introduced round to the national delegations.)

(I was introduced to the head of delegation from a "least developed nation" in sub-Saharan Africa. He said that it was absurd that someone from a US NGO like me would be fighting against the Broadcast Treaty.)

(After all, weren't the controversial provisions of the treaty were already law in the USA? I explained that they weren't and he thought maybe I was quibbling over definitions, but as I explained that these controversial elements could NEVER be US law...)

(That they would require a top-to-bottom rework of the entire regulatory framework for telcoms regulation, he was visibly shaken. "Oh dear," he said, "I'll have to ask Mr So-and-So about this.")

(Once he'd gone, I asked another NGO rep who'd been there longer than me: "Who's this Mr. So-and-So?" and he said, "Oh, that's the head of the US Nat'l Assoc of Broadcasters. He's been advising least developed nations on how to "modernise" their broadcast policy.")

(In other words, these nations had been told outright lies to trick them into enacting policies that the NAB could never get at home. They had relied on big corporate rightsholders for technical advice, and they'd been fleeced)

Crispin, ask yourself, is this what's happening to you? I mean, it's possible that every independent technologist has said that filters won't and can't work because we're all secretly funded by Big Tech.

But it is manifestly apparent that you, yourself, are not very technical. Who told you that filters would work out great for you and your members? Is it the same people who are feeding you these ridiculous and untrue smears that you keep repeating?

Is the same someone telling you lies like "Oh, don't listen to Doctorow, he's a failed novelist, he works for a nonprofit funded by Big Tech," also telling you "These filters will work great, they're just not willing to deploy them?"

Whomever is feeding you the personal smears you're attacking me with clearly doesn't give a damn if you look like a fool in public. Do you think their scruples extend to lying to you about whether your members will thrive or suffer under #Article13?

If they had great technical arguments to rebut the technologists who say filters are a serious danger, don't you think they'd be feeding you THOSE, rather than personal attacks?

After all, even if all the libels you've been fed were true, it wouldn't have any bearing on whether filters work or don't work.

Crispin, I work part-time for EFF for a very modest fee. I can afford to do that - and pay my mortgage, etc - because I get hundreds of thousands of dollars every year from the largest entertainment companies on earth, who pay me for my copyrights.

If you think that my point of view is driven by who's paying me, you've been very, very misinformed.

While we're on the subject. I know some VERY good investigative journalists. if you want to turn whistleblower and talk to one of them about the people who've been feeding you this rubbish and have them run the sources to ground, DM me. @crispinhunt