Select your localized edition:

Close ×

More Ways to Connect

Discover one of our 28 local entrepreneurial communities »

Be the first to know as we launch in new countries and markets around the globe.

Interested in bringing MIT Technology Review to your local market?

MIT Technology ReviewMIT Technology Review - logo


Unsupported browser: Your browser does not meet modern web standards. See how it scores »

{ action.text }

U.S. Supreme Court nominee John G. Roberts’ positions on digital issues are as inscrutable as his positions on other issues, says this Wired News article. (Why do I have the impression the administration prefers it this way?) “He was willing to represent the states in their antitrust case against Microsoft, so he is not a shill for corporate interests,” said one law professor.

Attorneys at the Electronic Frontier Foundation are holding their breath along with everyone else, calling Roberts’ record “both sparse and mixed.” While he sided with Verizon against the Recording Industry Association of America when the music trade group sought the identities of suspected illegal file traders, he also tends to bow to government authority, as he did in a case that let regulators take some items out of the public domain.
So even the EFF attorneys are waiting to see what information Roberts’ confirmation hearings offer. Is this really the way to go about appointing someone to the country’s highest court?

0 comments about this story. Start the discussion »

Reprints and Permissions | Send feedback to the editor

From the Archives


Introducing MIT Technology Review Insider.

Already a Magazine subscriber?

You're automatically an Insider. It's easy to activate or upgrade your account.

Activate Your Account

Become an Insider

It's the new way to subscribe. Get even more of the tech news, research, and discoveries you crave.

Sign Up

Learn More

Find out why MIT Technology Review Insider is for you and explore your options.

Show Me