From pedro@tastytronic.net Wed, 25 Jul 2001 22:06:21 -0500 Date: Wed, 25 Jul 2001 22:06:21 -0500 From: Peter A. Peterson II pedro@tastytronic.net Subject: [sklyarov-chicago] [ssteele@eff.org: Re: Why Mueller? Can You Say 'Pressure Point'?] Keep this in mind, folks. pedro ----- Forwarded message from Shari Steele <ssteele@eff.org> ----- Hi Seth. Mueller is not a target. We found out today that he has been in DC for over six months as an Acting Assistant Attorney General. There has been an Acting U.S. Attorney for the Northern District of California, and he is the one who has power over this decision. Putting pressure on the Senate Judiciary Committee makes it look like we don't know what's going on, and putting pressure on Mueller potentially makes an enemy of the new Director of the FBI. Shari At 03:51 PM 7/25/01 -0700, Seth David Schoen wrote: >Stanton McCandlish writes: > > > > EFF actually worked with then-Rep. Cantwell on her bill, once upon a > > > time. Are any of the EFF staff members who were involved with that > > > still at EFF? > > > > Our exec. dir., Shari Steele. > >Shari, do you have any interest in getting in touch with Sen. >Cantwell? She's on the Senate Judiciary Committee these days. > >Do you know what she thinks about the DMCA? She used to be an >executive at Real Networks (boo, hiss) while she was on vacation >from being a Member of Congress. > >-- >Seth Schoen >Volunteer Technologist schoen@eff.org >Electronic Frontier Foundation http://www.eff.org/ >454 Shotwell Street, San Francisco, CA 94110 ~.~.~.~.~.~.~.~.~.~.~.~.~.~.~.~.~.~.~.~.~.~.~.~.~.~.~.~.~.~.~.~.~.~.~ Shari Steele Executive Director ssteele@eff.org Electronic Frontier Foundation +1 415 436 9333 x103 (voice) 454 Shotwell Street +1 415 436 9993 (fax) San Francisco, CA 94110 ----- End forwarded message ----- -- --------------------------------------------------------------------- FREE DMITRY SKLYAROV -- FBI has imprisioned a Russian software engineer for promoting and teaching the concept of "fair use". Read more: http://www.eff.org/alerts/20010719_eff_sklyarov_alert.html
From korbomite@yahoo.com Wed, 25 Jul 2001 21:02:24 -0700 (PDT) Date: Wed, 25 Jul 2001 21:02:24 -0700 (PDT) From: Michael Cannon korbomite@yahoo.com Subject: [sklyarov-chicago] [ssteele@eff.org: Re: Why Mueller? Can You Say 'Pressure Point'?] Somebody needs to ask Ms. Shari of the EFF: 1. Who is the NOMINAL US Attorney? If it is Mueller, than he is responsible, as anything done in his district is done in his name and identified with him. If he has the title, than he is the responsible party. After all, there ARE such things as telephones and email. Finally, on this issue, what was he working on in Washington? 2. Where has all the money disbursed to the EFF for Dmitry's defense gone? Why does Dmitry STILL have a public defender? Why are we hearing nothing from the EFF? Why is Nightline interviewing Cheney and not Marty or you? 3. It seems that we are far more effective at getting things done than you folks are. Why should we listen to you? You've been working to get this thing defeated for 3 years...we worked for 3 days and got more coverage than you have in all that time. Again, what do we need you for? It seems that all you folks are doing is exploiting this to pump up your membership rolls and your Treasury. Where has the money gone? Mike Cannon Chicago --- "Peter A. Peterson II" <pedro@tastytronic.net> wrote: > Keep this in mind, folks. > > pedro > > ----- Forwarded message from Shari Steele > <ssteele@eff.org> ----- > > Hi Seth. > Mueller is not a target. We found out today that he > has been in DC for > over six months as an Acting Assistant Attorney > General. There has been an > Acting U.S. Attorney for the Northern District of > California, and he is the > one who has power over this decision. Putting > pressure on the Senate > Judiciary Committee makes it look like we don't know > what's going on, and > putting pressure on Mueller potentially makes an > enemy of the new Director > of the FBI. > Shari > > At 03:51 PM 7/25/01 -0700, Seth David Schoen wrote: > >Stanton McCandlish writes: > > > > > > EFF actually worked with then-Rep. Cantwell on > her bill, once upon a > > > > time. Are any of the EFF staff members who > were involved with that > > > > still at EFF? > > > > > > Our exec. dir., Shari Steele. > > > >Shari, do you have any interest in getting in touch > with Sen. > >Cantwell? She's on the Senate Judiciary Committee > these days. > > > >Do you know what she thinks about the DMCA? She > used to be an > >executive at Real Networks (boo, hiss) while she > was on vacation > >from being a Member of Congress. > > > >-- > >Seth Schoen > >Volunteer Technologist > schoen@eff.org > >Electronic Frontier Foundation > http://www.eff.org/ > >454 Shotwell Street, San Francisco, CA 94110 > > ~.~.~.~.~.~.~.~.~.~.~.~.~.~.~.~.~.~.~.~.~.~.~.~.~.~.~.~.~.~.~.~.~.~.~ > Shari Steele > Executive Director > ssteele@eff.org > Electronic Frontier Foundation +1 415 436 > 9333 x103 (voice) > 454 Shotwell Street +1 > 415 436 9993 (fax) > San Francisco, CA 94110 > > > ----- End forwarded message ----- > > -- > --------------------------------------------------------------------- > FREE DMITRY SKLYAROV -- FBI has imprisioned a > Russian software > engineer for promoting and teaching the concept > of "fair use". > Read more: > http://www.eff.org/alerts/20010719_eff_sklyarov_alert.html > > > _______________________________________________ > http://www.freesklyarov.org/ -- FREE DMITRY! > sklyarov-chicago@ufo.chicago.il.us > http://ufo.chicago.il.us/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/sklyarov-chicago
From pedro@tastytronic.net Thu, 26 Jul 2001 01:53:50 -0500 Date: Thu, 26 Jul 2001 01:53:50 -0500 From: Peter A. Peterson II pedro@tastytronic.net Subject: [sklyarov-chicago] [ssteele@eff.org: Re: Why Mueller? Can You Say 'Pressure Point'?] Quoting Michael Cannon: > 2. Where has all the money disbursed to the EFF for > Dmitry's defense gone? Why does Dmitry STILL have a > public defender? Why are we hearing nothing from the > EFF? Why is Nightline interviewing Cheney and not > Marty or you? We're not hearing anything from the EFF because a.) they are preparing for meetings this Friday with the DoJ and b.) we are planning protests, and they are not involved in the protests. I am looking into answers regarding the issue of monies and defense. Did you trust them until recently? Or why did you donate money to an organization that you do not trust? pedro
From korbomite@yahoo.com Thu, 26 Jul 2001 00:13:33 -0700 (PDT) Date: Thu, 26 Jul 2001 00:13:33 -0700 (PDT) From: Michael Cannon korbomite@yahoo.com Subject: Fwd: Re: [sklyarov-chicago] [ssteele@eff.org: Re: Why Mueller? Can You Say 'Pressure Point'?] 1. I contributed as I always do, through one of my corporate accounts. 2. You guys mentioned Sun Tzu, I just put 2+2 together and realized we were being spun. Plus, I went back to the 'rejectmueller.com' site and finally caught on to the whole thing. Mitch is up to his old tricks, accompanied by a BUNCH of expensive Washington insiders. Mike --- Michael Cannon <korbomite@yahoo.com> wrote: > Date: Thu, 26 Jul 2001 00:04:35 -0700 (PDT) > From: Michael Cannon <korbomite@yahoo.com> > Subject: Re: [sklyarov-chicago] [ssteele@eff.org: > Re: Why Mueller? Can You Say 'Pressure Point'?] > To: "Peter A. Peterson II" <pedro@tastytronic.net> > > As a result of their correspondence, the > 'rejectmueller.com site' has changed and may go > black...you guys brought up Sun Tzu...I just put 2+@ > together and realized we wre being 'spun.' > > Mike > --- "Peter A. Peterson II" <pedro@tastytronic.net> > wrote: > > Quoting Michael Cannon: > > > 2. Where has all the money disbursed to the EFF > > for > > > Dmitry's defense gone? Why does Dmitry STILL > have > > a > > > public defender? Why are we hearing nothing > from > > the > > > EFF? Why is Nightline interviewing Cheney and > not > > > Marty or you? > > > > We're not hearing anything from the EFF because > a.) > > they are preparing > > for meetings this Friday with the DoJ and b.) we > are > > planning protests, > > and they are not involved in the protests. > > > > I am looking into answers regarding the issue of > > monies and defense. Did > > you trust them until recently? Or why did you > donate > > money to an > > organization that you do not trust? > > > > pedro
From pedro@tastytronic.net Thu, 26 Jul 2001 02:29:02 -0500 Date: Thu, 26 Jul 2001 02:29:02 -0500 From: Peter A. Peterson II pedro@tastytronic.net Subject: Fwd: Re: [sklyarov-chicago] [ssteele@eff.org: Re: Why Mueller? Can You Say 'Pressure Point'?] Quoting Michael Cannon: > 1. I contributed as I always do, through one of my > corporate accounts. You didn't answer my question. Why do you donate money to an organization whose intentions you do not trust? > 2. You guys mentioned Sun Tzu, I just put 2+2 > together and realized we were being spun. Plus, I > went back to the 'rejectmueller.com' site and finally > caught on to the whole thing. What is "the whole thing"? > Mitch is up to his old tricks, accompanied by a BUNCH of expensive > Washington insiders. What are Mitch's old tricks? pedro
From korbomite@yahoo.com Thu, 26 Jul 2001 00:55:38 -0700 (PDT) Date: Thu, 26 Jul 2001 00:55:38 -0700 (PDT) From: Michael Cannon korbomite@yahoo.com Subject: Fwd: Re: [sklyarov-chicago] [ssteele@eff.org: Re: Why Mueller? Can You Say 'Pressure Point'?] 1. I trusted them at the time. 2. Mitch Kapor has been at this for YEARS with no forward momentum. He's been colllecting money and the laws are still on the books and DMITRY IS STILL IN JAIL!!! The 'whole thing' is the idea of a 'stalking horse (not Sun Tzu).' The EFF is the cover for the bread and circuses act, to show something is being done to further 'the cause,' while inertia builds up and the laws aren't challenged. The EFF has been ineffectual. This is our best hope to keep the cause in the spotlight and they're 'negotiating.' Tomorrow is TEN days. In short, we're being spun by the very people who we trust to act on our behalf. The EFF lobbied the 'rejectmueller.com' folks to stop and redirect at an ASSISTANT US Attorney, not the guy in charge! Conclusion: Mueller is their guy, too. Remember the Wired article (link: http://www.wired.com/news/politics/0,1283,45522,00.html) Here are some more about Mueller: http://www.newsmakingnews.com/mueller2,9,00.htm http://www.usdoj.gov/opa/pr/1999/July/319dag.htm When it comes to the DMCA, this guy is Ashcroft and the AAP/MPAA/BSA 's dream boy!!! NOTHING can get more press running to post to deadline than a Cabinet confirmation (except for a Supreme Court nomination) and the EFF is urging us to 'calm down.' We've accomplished more in three days than they have in three years! Adobe caved BEFORE the EFF meeting, because of the threat of the boycott and the demonstrations. Go look at the dateline of the PR release. It takes DAYS to get that kind of release out of a corp like Adobe...it was pre-prepared. We did it ALL!!! PLEASE remember: Dmitry NEVER had to go to jail. Adobe could have protested his entry visa a month before DefCon 9 to the State Department and he never would have been allowed in the country. Instead, Warnock and company lobbied Mueller (actually, probably started with Ashcroft, but we'll NEVER prove that without a LOT of FOIA paperwork) for his arrest, rather than a writ of exclusion from the State Department. I'll keep repeating that, Peter until you see the REAL tragedy here. What I don't understand is why YOU are so hesitant to go after a corporation and people like Mueller. They amke PERFECT targets to get the 'Joe Six-Packs' up in arms. Rich white geeks with doctorates, and the FBI...that appeals across ALL demographics. Mike --- "Peter A. Peterson II" <pedro@tastytronic.net> wrote: > Quoting Michael Cannon: > > 1. I contributed as I always do, through one of > my > > corporate accounts. > > You didn't answer my question. Why do you donate > money to an > organization whose intentions you do not trust? > > > 2. You guys mentioned Sun Tzu, I just put 2+2 > > together and realized we were being spun. Plus, I > > went back to the 'rejectmueller.com' site and > finally > > caught on to the whole thing. > > What is "the whole thing"? > > > Mitch is up to his old tricks, accompanied by a > BUNCH of expensive > > Washington insiders. > > What are Mitch's old tricks? > > pedro
From pedro@tastytronic.net Thu, 26 Jul 2001 10:12:28 -0500 Date: Thu, 26 Jul 2001 10:12:28 -0500 From: Peter A. Peterson II pedro@tastytronic.net Subject: Fwd: Re: [sklyarov-chicago] [ssteele@eff.org: Re: Why Mueller? Can You Say 'Pressure Point'?] Quoting Michael Cannon: > 2. Mitch Kapor has been at this for YEARS with no > forward momentum. He's been colllecting money and the > laws are still on the books and DMITRY IS STILL IN > JAIL!!! The 'whole thing' is the idea of a 'stalking > horse (not Sun Tzu).' The EFF is the cover for the > bread and circuses act, to show something is being > done to further 'the cause,' while inertia builds up > and the laws aren't challenged. The EFF has been > ineffectual. This is our best hope to keep the cause > in the spotlight and they're 'negotiating.' Tomorrow > is TEN days. I don't doubt that they could probably "do more." But I don't believe that 10 days is a ridiculous amount of time for something like this to be sorted out. IF the DoJ decides to release Dmitry, it was contingent on Adobe's dropping the complaint. Regardless of whether Adobe had or had not planned to do this in advance, the EFF had to be there to try to make sure that happened. > In short, we're being spun by the very people who we > trust to act on our behalf. The EFF lobbied the > 'rejectmueller.com' folks to stop and redirect at an > ASSISTANT US Attorney, not the guy in charge! I sincerely believe they think it is more useful to attack the assistant attorney, as opposed to Mueller. THe example was given of pressure on Louis Freeh in the late 90s re encryption versus Janet Reno, who was not a useful target. Mueller will be confirmed if he was going to be confirmed -- there is not time to stop that now. FOr that matter, we do not know the facts wrt Mueller's involvement in this case. Isn't it possible that the Asst. Attorney thought this would be a great case to put under his belt and so he did it while Mueller was away? (The rookie trying to bring down "something big"?) Because we _do not know the facts_ regarding Mueller, protesting his involvement, or putting his name on signs is risky and _unsupportable!_ Unless you can provide us with documents that incontrovertably show that Mueller OKed this action, I'M not going to protest him. And I'm not going to argue this point anymore. > Conclusion: Mueller is their guy, too. Anyone who's read up on Mueller I think knows that he's not a friend of the EFF. I think that's a pretty wild and unsupportable claim, that really doesn't jive when you place it next to the action record of the EFF. Remember the > Wired article (link: > http://www.wired.com/news/politics/0,1283,45522,00.html) > > Here are some more about Mueller: > > http://www.newsmakingnews.com/mueller2,9,00.htm > > http://www.usdoj.gov/opa/pr/1999/July/319dag.htm > > When it comes to the DMCA, this guy is Ashcroft and > the AAP/MPAA/BSA 's dream boy!!! And he's *also* a friend of the EFF? No. > NOTHING can get more press running to post to deadline > than a Cabinet confirmation (except for a Supreme > Court nomination) and the EFF is urging us to 'calm > down.' See above. > We've accomplished more in three days than they have > in three years! Adobe caved BEFORE the EFF meeting, > because of the threat of the boycott and the > demonstrations. Go look at the dateline of the PR > release. It takes DAYS to get that kind of release > out of a corp like Adobe...it was pre-prepared. We > did it ALL!!! I believe Adobe caved because they had nothing more to gain from Dmitry being in prison. Also, it was a *joint* press release between the EFF and Adobe. If it takes DAYS to do that, then the EFF is *completely* full of bs and in cahoots with Adobe. Again, that does not make sense. > PLEASE remember: Dmitry NEVER had to go to jail. > Adobe could have protested his entry visa a month > before DefCon 9 to the State Department and he never > would have been allowed in the country. Instead, > Warnock and company lobbied Mueller (actually, > probably started with Ashcroft, but we'll NEVER prove > that without a LOT of FOIA paperwork) for his arrest, > rather than a writ of exclusion from the State > Department. I agree with you here. It was despicable that Adobe chose to allow him to come to the states in order to arrest him, rather than just keep him out of the country. But this would not support Adobe's desire for someone to squeeze (Dmitry). They let him come in, they didn't ask for a writ of exclusion, because THEY WANTED TO ARREST HIM! It's SIMPLE! And you say it yourself -- we can't prove they specifically and personally lobbied Ashcroft; do we know that they actually got the green light from Mueller? If we don't know that from a reliable printed source, I will not make accusations about him, regardless of what I think of his politics. > I'll keep repeating that, Peter until you see the REAL > tragedy here. What I don't understand is why YOU are > so hesitant to go after a corporation and people like > Mueller. They amke PERFECT targets to get the 'Joe > Six-Packs' up in arms. Rich white geeks with > doctorates, and the FBI...that appeals across ALL > demographics. I won't "go after a corporation and people like Mueller" because we do not know the TRUTH about what happened. We DO know that Dmitry is in jail. We DO know the DMCA is a rotten piece of legislation. We DO know that we can write to our representatives and make people squirm just by being on the streets. I am not in the business of taking "perfect targets" and slandering them with information that I CANNOT SUBSTANTIATE. It's one thing to suggest that people boycott Adobe because of their pro-DMCA stance. It's another thing to tell the world about Mueller's involvement in the case based on speculation. Unless you provide me with this information, I am not going to argue about this any longer. We are wasting the groups time, tolerance, and motivation. I appreciate your passion and enthusiasm, Mike. I don't know if anyone else on the list has as much as you do. But I'm afraid you're maybe jumping the gun. Later today I'll be sending some information to the list regarding our plans for this coming Monday the 30th. In short, we want to do a repeat of Monday's leafletting with updated information wrt Adobe's withdrawing their complaint. Our focus will be that there is now NOBODY involved with this case that wants Dmitry in jail. Adobe made a pr coup by withdrawing their complaint -- but we can use that same coup to show that to prosecute Dmitry is not the right thing. It puts the burden back on the federal government to act on the wishes of not only the citizenry, but on the wishes of the corporation that put him there in the first place. I want to ask you to seriously consider coming back Monday (same time, same place) to spread the word again. I'd also like to invite people to start making signs now -- good looking, heavy duty signs. I'm going to make a full "sandwich board" sign. I'll update the poster .jpg with some new info, incorporating the rep. contact info as well as some urls for people to follow up. (And an updated breif.) (Note: this is what the San Francisco people are doing as well.) I want to personally thank everyone who participated and everyone who's found their way here. We have been a cog in the national theatre regarding this incident, and I want to continue to move in the right direction regarding it. We are members of a small community that are trying to provide this man with his freedom; and that's no small thing. Free Dmitry, Peter
From korbomite@yahoo.com Thu, 26 Jul 2001 08:50:46 -0700 (PDT) Date: Thu, 26 Jul 2001 08:50:46 -0700 (PDT) From: Michael Cannon korbomite@yahoo.com Subject: Fwd: Re: [sklyarov-chicago] [ssteele@eff.org: Re: Why Mueller? Can You Say 'Pressure Point'?] Wack a mole is fun. Seeding division in the ranks of the enemy is fun. The point now should be to pressure the EFF to keep the pressure on Adobe, the DoJ and paid puppets of the DMCA like SChroeder and Feinstein. BTW, could someone send that girl from TechTV a 'Free Dmitry' T-shirt? Mike --- "Peter A. Peterson II" <pedro@tastytronic.net> wrote: > Quoting Michael Cannon: > > 2. Mitch Kapor has been at this for YEARS with no > > forward momentum. He's been colllecting money and > the > > laws are still on the books and DMITRY IS STILL IN > > JAIL!!! The 'whole thing' is the idea of a > 'stalking > > horse (not Sun Tzu).' The EFF is the cover for > the > > bread and circuses act, to show something is being > > done to further 'the cause,' while inertia builds > up > > and the laws aren't challenged. The EFF has been > > ineffectual. This is our best hope to keep the > cause > > in the spotlight and they're 'negotiating.' > Tomorrow > > is TEN days. > > I don't doubt that they could probably "do more." > But I don't believe > that 10 days is a ridiculous amount of time for > something like this to > be sorted out. IF the DoJ decides to release Dmitry, > it was contingent > on Adobe's dropping the complaint. Regardless of > whether Adobe had or > had not planned to do this in advance, the EFF had > to be there to try to > make sure that happened. > > > In short, we're being spun by the very people who > we > > trust to act on our behalf. The EFF lobbied the > > 'rejectmueller.com' folks to stop and redirect at > an > > ASSISTANT US Attorney, not the guy in charge! > > I sincerely believe they think it is more useful to > attack the assistant > attorney, as opposed to Mueller. THe example was > given of pressure on > Louis Freeh in the late 90s re encryption versus > Janet Reno, who was not > a useful target. Mueller will be confirmed if he was > going to be > confirmed -- there is not time to stop that now. FOr > that matter, we do > not know the facts wrt Mueller's involvement in this > case. Isn't it > possible that the Asst. Attorney thought this would > be a great case to > put under his belt and so he did it while Mueller > was away? (The rookie > trying to bring down "something big"?) Because we > _do not know the > facts_ regarding Mueller, protesting his > involvement, or putting his > name on signs is risky and _unsupportable!_ Unless > you can provide us > with documents that incontrovertably show that > Mueller OKed this action, > I'M not going to protest him. And I'm not going to > argue this point > anymore. > > > > Conclusion: Mueller is their guy, too. > > Anyone who's read up on Mueller I think knows that > he's not a friend of > the EFF. I think that's a pretty wild and > unsupportable claim, that > really doesn't jive when you place it next to the > action record of the > EFF. > > Remember the > > Wired article (link: > > > http://www.wired.com/news/politics/0,1283,45522,00.html) > > > > Here are some more about Mueller: > > > > http://www.newsmakingnews.com/mueller2,9,00.htm > > > > http://www.usdoj.gov/opa/pr/1999/July/319dag.htm > > > > When it comes to the DMCA, this guy is Ashcroft > and > > the AAP/MPAA/BSA 's dream boy!!! > > And he's *also* a friend of the EFF? No. > > > NOTHING can get more press running to post to > deadline > > than a Cabinet confirmation (except for a Supreme > > Court nomination) and the EFF is urging us to > 'calm > > down.' > > See above. > > > We've accomplished more in three days than they > have > > in three years! Adobe caved BEFORE the EFF > meeting, > > because of the threat of the boycott and the > > demonstrations. Go look at the dateline of the PR > > release. It takes DAYS to get that kind of > release > > out of a corp like Adobe...it was pre-prepared. > We > > did it ALL!!! > > I believe Adobe caved because they had nothing more > to gain from Dmitry > being in prison. Also, it was a *joint* press > release between the EFF > and Adobe. If it takes DAYS to do that, then the EFF > is *completely* full > of bs and in cahoots with Adobe. Again, that does > not make sense. > > > > PLEASE remember: Dmitry NEVER had to go to jail. > > Adobe could have protested his entry visa a month > > before DefCon 9 to the State Department and he > never > > would have been allowed in the country. Instead, > > Warnock and company lobbied Mueller (actually, > > probably started with Ashcroft, but we'll NEVER > prove > > that without a LOT of FOIA paperwork) for his > arrest, > > rather than a writ of exclusion from the State > > Department. > > I agree with you here. It was despicable that Adobe > chose to allow him > to come to the states in order to arrest him, rather > than just keep him > out of the country. But this would not support > Adobe's desire for > someone to squeeze (Dmitry). They let him come in, > they didn't ask for a > writ of exclusion, because THEY WANTED TO ARREST > HIM! It's SIMPLE! And > you say it yourself -- we can't prove they > specifically and personally > lobbied Ashcroft; do we know that they actually got > the green light from > Mueller? If we don't know that from a reliable > printed source, I will > not make accusations about him, regardless of what I > think of his > politics. > > > I'll keep repeating that, Peter until you see the > REAL > > tragedy here. What I don't understand is why YOU > are > > so hesitant to go after a corporation and people > like > > Mueller. They amke PERFECT targets to get the > 'Joe > > Six-Packs' up in arms. Rich white geeks with > > doctorates, and the FBI...that appeals across ALL > > demographics. > > I won't "go after a corporation and people like > Mueller" because we do > not know the TRUTH about what happened. We DO know > that Dmitry is in > jail. We DO know the DMCA is a rotten piece of > legislation. We DO know > that we can write to our representatives and make > people squirm just by > being on the streets. I am not in the business of > taking "perfect > targets" and slandering them with information that I > CANNOT > SUBSTANTIATE. It's one thing to suggest that people > boycott Adobe > because of their pro-DMCA stance. It's another thing > to tell the world > about Mueller's involvement in the case based on > speculation. > > Unless you provide me with this information, I am > not going to argue > about this any longer. We are wasting the groups > time, tolerance, and > motivation. I appreciate your passion and > enthusiasm, Mike. I don't know > if anyone else on the list has as much as you do. > But I'm afraid you're > maybe jumping the gun. > > Later today I'll be sending some information to the > list regarding our > === message truncated ===