What is Digg?Related by Keyword 
How are these related stories? Tell us!
- ferretpants, on 10/11/2007, -14/+5Seems like it's working fine to me
- ferretpants, on 10/11/2007, -1/+10Looks like I'm an idiot
- tlogank, on 10/11/2007, -0/+5I wish he would shut down and stay down. I have been to his site a few times, he is an arrogant, self-promoting nobody. He basically just mirrors everything that TMZ.com puts up and makes tons of money doing it...that along with adding his stupid drawings over the pictures.
- BearinG, on 03/31/2008, -0/+1And look at him..
- sarazen, on 10/11/2007, -0/+48Down but right back up on another provider. This would have been more aptly titled, Perez Hilton sued for photo copyright violation again.
- mastercheif, on 10/11/2007, -28/+5Anybody else think this was Paris Hilton at first?
- raithetarkon, on 10/11/2007, -1/+6Sadly, yes..
- Jo9100, on 10/11/2007, -1/+2i would love to see paris hilton shut down! or at least if we could...
- satx, on 10/11/2007, -1/+2Nope...
- greatromance, on 10/11/2007, -2/+35Boo ***** hoo
- sv650touring, on 10/11/2007, -4/+78My sister loves that site. She has it on her Opera Speed Dial. I had never heard of it before, but if she likes it, then it must be awful.
- WestDC, on 10/11/2007, -1/+15Your sister uses Opera? Legend.
- MikeonTV, on 10/11/2007, -2/+1Your sister uses Opera? A family of nerds.
- torched, on 10/11/2007, -14/+2Big deal, an 100mb unmetered dual p4 dedicated server can be bought for as low as $2,000 per month these days.
- Lisztman, on 10/11/2007, -1/+52"Perez Hilton" and "journalist" should never go in the same sentence together.
- chizzed, on 10/11/2007, -6/+40Who the hell is Perez Hilton?
- Lisztman, on 10/11/2007, -1/+15Something of which you will regret learning about if you pursue this line of inquiry further.
- BearinG, on 03/31/2008, -0/+1Agreed.. I unfortunately found out from my girlfriend.. he didn't sound that bad when she said it.. until i learned more.. that and his stupid face
- Lisztman, on 10/11/2007, -1/+15Something of which you will regret learning about if you pursue this line of inquiry further.
- lavoie0ca, on 10/11/2007, -3/+7RTFA it sums up who "perez" is nicely.
fta:
Perez Hilton's popular Blog was shut down after his hosting service received complaints about him posting copyrighted photos. Perez is known for posting pictures of celebrities with the same three things written on them, slut, whore and cum dripping out of mouths of the males. That's basically it.
After being kicked off the web Tuessday he returned Wednseday with a new provider. Mario Lavanderia (his real name) is facing several lawsuits by paparazzi who claim he uses their stuff without permission. Hilton says he refuses to pay license fees claiming because he is a "journalist" he has the right to use the images for free.
Hilton has been sued before by photo agency X17 Inc. but a federal judge denied their motion, and now another lawsuit is being brought against him on the behalf of several other agencies and Universal Studios.
"Perezhilton.com stands by its commitment to protect the freedom of people to transform content on the internet for the purpose of commentary and satire and unquestionably believes that it comports with the fair use exception."
If you ask me this is a losing battle for the photo agencies, once a photo hits the Internet it is on 100 other websites, blogs and message boards in minutes. Also while they're battling Perez Hilton fifty more Hilton type websites are popping up. They should collect their money for first use of the pictures and then after that it's fair game, actually they really have no other choice in the matter when comes to the Internet.- TexanPsycho, on 10/11/2007, -0/+1While I think that Paris Hilton and the like should just get out of our lives, I have the same feelings for paparazzi. These are the people who are bringing them more so into the public glare. The question is who cares?
- Fhwqhgads, on 10/11/2007, -2/+1Anything posted on the Internet becomes public domain. I don't care what anyone says.
- violet02, on 10/11/2007, -0/+0I agree that once it hits the internet it's hard to regulate it. Everyone that blogs or uses myspace has probably posted photos that they're not allowed to. There are other bloggers that are allowed to use those images for free, they just have to credit the photos. That's his problem, he doesn't play nice.
- justdigginit, on 10/11/2007, -0/+1his site is running under a different host....the site lost the style sheet
- thesportoflife, on 10/11/2007, -2/+3hahahaha perez is hilarious in a lame way.
- vaconex, on 10/11/2007, -9/+4He's a theif. Using copyrighted works is a crime and should be.
- ISurfTooMuch, on 10/11/2007, -0/+3He's a thief if he's violating copyrights in a way not covered under fair use. I'm not going to get into whether what he's doing constitutes fair use, but not all unauthorized use of copyrighted works is illegal, no matter how much the big media companies would have you believe otherwise.
- HouseofEl, on 10/11/2007, -2/+1The question is are tabloids protected? Because while his site is nothing but gossip I would consider it a tabloid of some kind. I'm not familiar with the legalities of the tabloid press but this would seem to fall in that category.
- ISurfTooMuch, on 10/11/2007, -0/+5There are no distinctions in copyright law for "real" journalists and tabloid journalists, and this is a good thing. Otherwise, if only "real" journalists got protection, someone would have to judge who does and doesn't qualify. And, if that were to happen, you can bet that anyone not associated with the mainstream press would find that they aren't considered journalists. Any privileges given in this way can easily be taken away. That's why we don't have mandatory codes of conduct for the press. Things like that have a way of being used against anyone who says or prints things that someone, especially the government, disagrees with.
What matters is whether or not his use of these photos falls under fair use.
- ISurfTooMuch, on 10/11/2007, -0/+5There are no distinctions in copyright law for "real" journalists and tabloid journalists, and this is a good thing. Otherwise, if only "real" journalists got protection, someone would have to judge who does and doesn't qualify. And, if that were to happen, you can bet that anyone not associated with the mainstream press would find that they aren't considered journalists. Any privileges given in this way can easily be taken away. That's why we don't have mandatory codes of conduct for the press. Things like that have a way of being used against anyone who says or prints things that someone, especially the government, disagrees with.
- ragunax, on 10/11/2007, -3/+13He's a douche.
- blogosphear, on 10/11/2007, -2/+32So the paparazzi are upset that photos they've taken of celebrities without permission are being used by someone who didn't ask for permission?
- ISurfTooMuch, on 10/11/2007, -2/+3As scummy as these paparazzi are, if someone is in a public area, anyone can photograph them. I can walk outside and snap pictures of anyone I want, provided they're in a public area or can be seen from one.
However, don't think for a moment that I condone the way these photographers act. There are many things that are legal and need to remain legal, but the way that some people exploit that legality for their own ends is pretty slimy.- thesportoflife, on 10/11/2007, -0/+3ill remember this next time im in the public toilets with my camera poking through the toilets and taking pics of chicks on the beach........
- ISurfTooMuch, on 10/11/2007, -0/+1Careful there. My media law is a little rusty, but I believe the way it's interpreted, you can photograph someone only if they're either in a public area or viewable from one. I do believe that using something like a telephoto lens to photograph someone in a private area that you couldn't ordinarily see with the naked eye might get you in trouble. Also, I don't think a public toilet would be considered a public area. I could be wrong, but I'm betting it isn't. Let me know how that one works out.
But as for chicks on the beach, if it's a public beach, you're all clear. Except that you might get the crap beat out of you by an angry husband or boyfriend. :)
- ISurfTooMuch, on 10/11/2007, -0/+1Careful there. My media law is a little rusty, but I believe the way it's interpreted, you can photograph someone only if they're either in a public area or viewable from one. I do believe that using something like a telephoto lens to photograph someone in a private area that you couldn't ordinarily see with the naked eye might get you in trouble. Also, I don't think a public toilet would be considered a public area. I could be wrong, but I'm betting it isn't. Let me know how that one works out.
- thesportoflife, on 10/11/2007, -0/+3ill remember this next time im in the public toilets with my camera poking through the toilets and taking pics of chicks on the beach........
- lieutenantmudd, on 10/11/2007, -0/+1"without permission"
i am sure the paparazzi make some people's lives miserable, but most of the people in tabloids are only famous enough to be in tabloids because they got famous from being in tabloids. Celebrities have symbiotic relationships with all this *****. They need the magazines to keep their names out there. And I don't feel bad at all if people get pissed when they are followed around when they encourage it the other 90% of the time.- violet02, on 10/11/2007, -0/+0That's the only way celebrities stay popular, by being in people's faces all the time in magazines. The only lame part is when the paparazzi do stuff like block their cars and climb over walls to get private shots in their houses. That's gotta suck.
- ISurfTooMuch, on 10/11/2007, -2/+3As scummy as these paparazzi are, if someone is in a public area, anyone can photograph them. I can walk outside and snap pictures of anyone I want, provided they're in a public area or can be seen from one.
- jonpotz, on 10/11/2007, -3/+18As a webmaster myself, I give Perez Hilton credit. He made something out of nothing and gives TMZ a run for their money.
However, being in the adult webmaster business, I know all about copyrighted images and the trouble it can get you in.
When it comes down to it, no matter what, the law says if you take someones copyrighted photo and display it on your page without permission, you get owned.
Best of luck to Perez, as much as I hate all this petty celeb *****.
Isn't it ironic that our country is in shambles and rather than registering to vote and keeping a close eye on what is going on, people would rather ignore everything and only worry about the newest post on TMZ or Perez. It is kind of sad.
Yadidimean? - TheGeek27, on 10/11/2007, -5/+2This just in:
WHO CARES? - fkr3, on 10/11/2007, -2/+2Maybe he's got the right to use them, but that doesn't mean he has the right to profit off them.
- JackQuack, on 10/11/2007, -0/+4This guy is actually friends with Paris apparently.
- EochaidRiata, on 10/11/2007, -5/+2They are letting her blog from jail? WTF.
- jonpotz, on 10/11/2007, -1/+1Hell, when I was locked up, I was able to blog from the jail library everyday.
www.jailbaitblogs.com
SIKE...SIKE AGAIN...SIKE AGAIN....
- jonpotz, on 10/11/2007, -1/+1Hell, when I was locked up, I was able to blog from the jail library everyday.
- IllBeBack, on 10/11/2007, -2/+1So, some sleazebags are mad because some other sleazebag is using their pictures? Who gives a *****?
- LilRabbitFooFoo, on 08/11/2008, -0/+7My cat has more credibility than this clown.
- rdoger6424, on 10/11/2007, -0/+1Go see if the National Enquirer is hiring cats!
- AlexanderZero, on 10/11/2007, -2/+7Well Perez, you see copyright laws were invented so dicks like you can't steal other people's hard work. It's as if someone else learned a trade, used their skills to produce something valuable, and then having you profit from it. Oh wait...
- effinboy, on 10/11/2007, -1/+4And after that piece of pointless news, at least we can all poke fun at decepticrat for reading 2snaps.tv news.
- m2paper, on 10/11/2007, -3/+7Who the hell is Perez Hilton?
- lillepalle, on 10/11/2007, -2/+7Now had he only been spreading copyrightet mp3-files, he would have recieved tonnes of well-wishings from diggers.
Information wants to be free, *****! That includes pictures!- rdoger6424, on 10/11/2007, -0/+1not if they were paris hilton mp3s
or even worse, perez hilton mp3s
- rdoger6424, on 10/11/2007, -0/+1not if they were paris hilton mp3s
- LucifugeWraith, on 10/11/2007, -2/+0...and people care about this?
- hiro, on 10/11/2007, -3/+1She should serve the full sentence like anyone else would have to
- Andicow, on 10/11/2007, -1/+1I do hope this is successful this time. I am quite tired of people in actual news stories citing his opinion. I mean, really, the guy has zero credibility. Let us stop using his opinion as a source. Thanks!
- rYno, on 10/11/2007, -1/+1site looks up to me... ?
- confusednazgul, on 10/11/2007, -0/+4If only it was permanent. Perez Hilton is one of the biggest douchebags currently in existence.
- alpine75, on 10/11/2007, -0/+7Perez is one hateful man. He makes a living off using MS paint to "doodle" on celeb photo's. It's his daily work to make hateful statements about people. However, when someone makes a statement concerning homosexuality he doesn't like he demands they be taken off the air (Isaiah Washington) for their hatefulness.
He is essentially what you might call a hypocrite. - CurlyHayami, on 10/11/2007, -1/+3HA! He's no journalist...just some crazy [gay] guy who has a sad obsession with celebrities.
- snowbusiness, on 10/11/2007, -1/+1Why not have the site hosted in another country where you can't get in trouble? I'm sure it would be more $$, but that site has to be making a ton of it.
- GeneralBison, on 10/11/2007, -1/+1I'm still waiting for 'Paris Hilton Shut Up'!
- sfatoo, on 10/11/2007, -0/+2Great. Perez Hilton vs the paparazzi. Can they somehow both lose in this "battle"?
- hshadow914, on 10/11/2007, -0/+1i dugg it only because i like the fact that "his" website was down...
- digtbk, on 10/11/2007, -0/+1Notice how he's removed the ability to comment on his "articles"?
- darlyn, on 10/11/2007, -0/+1His site looks like a darned MySpace page.
- ThDecider, on 10/11/2007, -0/+2dugg down for not being Paris Hilton
- starmuscle, on 10/11/2007, -1/+1You can all go to this better blog instead:
http://www.starmuscle.com
Digg is coming to a city (and computer) near you! Check out all the details on our 
© Digg Inc. 2009 — Content posted by Digg users is