Ah, I see your point, although I still don't agree with it. The simplest explanation for the EFF's behavior is that in this case a confrontational stance was n

Ah, I see your point, although I still don't agree with it. The simplest explanation for the EFF's behavior is that in this case a confrontational stance was not necessary -- and in fact would have been counter-productive. CL has not only supported EFF values for a longtime, it also reversed the new user licensing terms very quickly. In other words, CL is very different from, and deserves different treatment than, a copyright or patent troll. Had CL persisted with those insane end-user terms, I have no doubt the EFF would have taken an increasingly confrontational stance. Thanks for the prompt response.