I am able to access some of his syllabi for his law and policy classes from his homepage (for example, here's a syllabus for Digital Surveillance [1]), but can't find very particularly much on his politics.
Does anyone know where he stands on public policy with regard to IP law, civil law, domestic surveillance and domestic propaganda?
It all depends on time, though it's unlikely I'll do a dossier on the EFF unless something prompts it.
I will say broadly that their coverage of information sharing, surveillance law, and intellectual property is rounded down to their specific issues and narrow perspective - and these issues aren't necessarily one-for-one mappings to "what's best for the internet/civility".
One example that comes to mind was their coverage of the recent Obama Administration Executive Order 13694 [1][2] where they dropped the international purpose and nature of the order entirely, as if the sanctions weren't directed towards, and enforced by law, at actors in China and Russia (and Iran and smaller players) overseas.
Following Snowden - who truly did show that the NSA was surveiling hundreds of millions of Americans - the EFF's speculatory, alarmist and misleading coverage of national cybersecurity and civil rights confused and angered a confused and angry group of people we would rather have engaged in deliberate and reasonable debate. Namely, despite how different in kind, scope, purpose and method EO 13694 is, the EFF reported on it with the tone of the Snowden disclosures and its audience associated the two.
I have spoken, too, with the EFF - and was disappointed both by their their inability to use PGP (even after suggesting it to others) and the way they engaged with the material I provided them. [I sent them evidence of a backdoor in popular software and an analysis of a possible convenient backdoor location for a popular hardware brand; they quietly acknowledged these reports but AFAICT did nothing with them - as a comparison when I sent similar material, using PGP, to cryptome they were immediately published.]
I should not have been so disappointed by what they did with the materials I sent to them: I did not understand at the time the scope of the EFF - that even their published matrix of trustworthy communication software was a stretch of their operating scope.
So this isn't to rag so very much on the EFF. I think they have a role in advocacy and journalism and the legal landscape. I'm just not willing to invest my full and unquestioning faith in the reports of any interest group - for even those with good intentions are not infallible.
Does anyone know where he stands on public policy with regard to IP law, civil law, domestic surveillance and domestic propaganda?
[1] https://www.cs.princeton.edu/courses/archive/fall13/cos597G/