Because... we presume guilty until proven innocent and don't provide people legal counsel?
-
After the Matthew DeHardt case, there's no valid reason to assume he has council.
Is this really what people want the EFF to do for their donations? Is this on offer for everyone indicted for dev'ing banking trojans?
-
-
Perhaps wait and see why
@OrinKerr finds the indictment somewhat problematic? -
Looking forward to it!
End of conversation
New conversation -
-
-
It looks to me like EFF simply reacts to oppose all actions from the FBI, they're anti-government rather than pro-"your rights online"
-
Perhaps because I'm much more anti-FBI than the EFF, I don't find them anti-FBI enough.
- 4 more replies
New conversation -
-
-
It's an offer for everyone who makes solid contributions to the security research community.
-
I assume. Because they've spent considerable resources on security researchers, and little on malware criminals.
End of conversation
New conversation -
-
-
To step up for researchers at least until facts are better known? Yes. To mount full blown defenses for malware devs? No.
Thanks. Twitter will use this to make your timeline better. UndoUndo
-
-
-
@eff offering help doesn't mean they'll end up defending him, fair to let them evaluate his case, esp. given his profileThanks. Twitter will use this to make your timeline better. UndoUndo
-
Loading seems to be taking a while.
Twitter may be over capacity or experiencing a momentary hiccup. Try again or visit Twitter Status for more information.