A common funding source is a real connection.
Oak’s reports identify multiyear support for 5Rights, WeProtect, Check My Ads, Statewatch and Digital Freedom Fund. These awards give organisations capacity and deserve scrutiny on their own terms: amount, duration, purpose and decision rights.
The recipients disagree about the means.
Statewatch endorsed objections to broad scanning and possible identity requirements in the EU child-abuse proposal in September 2023. WeProtect’s Secretariat supported mandatory detection with safeguards in an earlier version of that debate. The positions diverge, although they concern different versions and dates.
That is useful evidence against explaining every recipient’s action through a single donor programme. Shared funding does not erase disagreement or tell us which organisation will prevail.
Money can sustain action that already exists.
Digital Freedom Fund reports a June 2026 grant supporting Liberty’s challenge concerning the alleged Apple technical-capability notice. Liberty filed in March 2025. The dates support a role in sustaining litigation; they do not support a claim that this grant originated the filing.
DFF also describes external peers taking part in selection. A donor’s grant, peer selection and the execution of an award are separate decisions. Actual terms and approval records would reveal more about where each party’s discretion begins and ends.