What is Digg?114 Comments
- NYC83, on 11/20/2007, -0/+141the entertainment industry is digging its own grave
- thatcrazycommie, on 11/20/2007, -6/+53FOX can suck a dick for all I care, but I liked the Reno movie.
- mctk, on 11/20/2007, -1/+42redstatepride, what you have just posted is one of the most insanely idiotic things I have ever read. At no point in your rambling, incoherent response were you even close to anything that could be considered a rational thought. Everyone in this forum is now dumber for having read it. I award you no points, and may God have mercy on your soul.
- BladeMelbourne, on 11/20/2007, -2/+37Let me guess - you work for the 20th Century Fox legal department?
- sw33tsarin, on 11/20/2007, -3/+33How old are you? Seriously, I know mental competence is not a prerequisite to post on digg but damn.
- utopianfoe, on 11/20/2007, -4/+23dugg
- darienphoenix, on 11/20/2007, -1/+18You rode the short bus, didn't you.
- king0770, on 11/20/2007, -5/+22In the music business, Artists don't really *need* a record company to produce/release their works these days. Hopefully, film makers will follow suite. These days, if you have decent equipment, and an Internet connection, you don't need a distributor to release your vision.
- Chicken2nite, on 11/20/2007, -0/+16You can claim fair use to Youtube and they're supposed to restore the video as per the DMCA. Ars Techinca did a story that made it to digg months ago about someone who uploaded to Youtube something that was easily considered fair use (an NFL logo or some such) and after receiving a takedown notice, he claimed fair use and it was restored. within a month, Youtube recieved another takedown notice and took it down again, even though that isn't the proper way to proceed as they need to argue why it isn't fair use.
I'll try to find the original article and post it here. Generally the studios just hire people to watch videos for 8 bucks an hour and take them down. it's very streamlined and impersonal. - DivisibleByZero, on 11/20/2007, -2/+17Unfortunately that's the way the DMCA works. They use some algorithm to find people using their works. It's smart enough to find their stuff, but not smart enough to see the context and that it's a review. This isn't them trying to stifle a dissenting voice; it's them letting a robot run amok on the Internet.
The DMCA does give you a right to dispute their claim though, so you're not totally screwed. I'm sure there's a hassle involved though. - robinator08, on 11/20/2007, -0/+14at least its entertaining to watch.
- UObean, on 11/20/2007, -0/+13Just file a DMCA counter-notice. Its not like this is the first time a group has filed a false DMCA claim.
- machineking, on 11/20/2007, -2/+13Campea is usually correct, and this time is no different.
- Spawn2105, on 11/20/2007, -0/+11What the Entertainment Industry is getting away with these days is starting to get ridiculous. I mean some of the companies are acting like they can do whatever they want because nobody has tried to stop them so far...
- qpn6ph9q, on 11/20/2007, -1/+12Indeed it does. With YouTube just file the counter notice here: http://www.google.com/support/youtube/bin/answer.p ...
--> A review containing clips from a movie will in almost every case be counted as fair use... even if it puts people off going to see the movie.
Do not put up with Big Media using the DMCA for censorship. - PHiZ187, on 11/20/2007, -0/+11Remember, you have the right to file a DMCA counter-notice, that the content is non-infringing.
http://fairusenetwork.org/reference/td.php - michelspc, on 11/20/2007, -0/+10If you saw the movie but did not watch the TV series you probably would not understand the movie. The movie takes very little time to develop characters. The writers assume you are already familiar with them.
My only expectation from the movie was to make me laugh and it did just that and nothing else.
With that being said, I'm glad FOX is being called out on their *****. I'm tired of companies claiming copyright over content that is user generated. - dillyhoo, on 11/20/2007, -1/+10Zing!
- BodomX, on 11/20/2007, -0/+9He still does.
- inactive, on 11/20/2007, -2/+11I love those toothless boycotts! ***** Fox! I'm not watching anything on that channel...well, except the show that I like...
- campea, on 11/20/2007, -0/+9That's funny, I just looked at my story again and not once did I launch into an all encoumpassing rant about the evils of Fox. They pulled one video, and I'm rightfully calling them on it. No more, no less.
- Chicken2nite, on 11/20/2007, -0/+8http://arstechnica.com/news.ars/post/20070320-nfl- ...
http://digg.com/tech_news/NFL_fumbles_DMCA_takedow ... - spucky, on 11/20/2007, -0/+8You have just got to check out this guys comment history! It is one of the funniest I think I have ever seen. Not really a lot to be proud of, though...
- davidsmero, on 11/20/2007, -3/+10I liked the movie too. It is a comedy and made me laugh quite a bit so that made it good.
- perfectprint, on 11/20/2007, -1/+8independently and home produced music can easily compete with albums produced with the help of millions of dollars - and go on to be just as and even more successful . independently produced film, for the most part, cannot. the budget for a music release can be as little as a couple of thousand...... for a movie it will still be a couple of million - - and will still be governed by those with a financial investments as opposed to those with a creative one.... which will lead to the same problems associated with this topic.
- RedHerringHack, on 11/20/2007, -0/+7Read up on the streisand effect.
- cloudyprison, on 11/20/2007, -0/+7"I'm a movie critic by trade, and until recently I got paid to tell you people which movies merely stink and which movies you shouldn't screen near an open flame. Well, I'm putting the burden of lousy movies back on you. It's very simple: If you stop going to bad movies, they'll stop making bad movies. If the movie used to be a TV show, just don't go. After Roman Numeral II, give it a rest. If it's a remake of a classic, rent the classic. Tell them you want stories about people, not a 100 million dollars of stunts and explosions. People it's up to you. If the movie stinks, just don't go."
- Jay Sherman - insllvn, on 11/20/2007, -0/+6Fox.
- barnettatron, on 11/20/2007, -1/+7The movie being good or bad isn't the issue here for crying out loud. It's the fact that the review (John does a lot of these short video reviews btw and themovieblog holds a certain amount of respect in the online movie community) was created under the 'fair use' laws but Fox are only trying to take it down because the review was a negative one. John hasn't done anything wrong but a big company is trying to pull something down that they have no right to just because they think they can.
I love the Reno as a TV show but the movie did suck some serious balls. - virtualball, on 11/20/2007, -0/+6So... wait... lemme get this straight. NBC makes House but it is aired on FOX, but in turn ABC makes Scrubs but it is aired on NBC? Huh? *Head explodes*
- brentinkc, on 11/20/2007, -1/+7I don't think it's all that rare
Offspring released "Smash" independently in 1995 and it sold over 5 million copies - Billistic, on 11/20/2007, -0/+5That's sort of the issue, for you doing well for a signed artist is being rich.
Do you think you'd constantly hear about unsigned artists who just make an average living? - Croaton, on 11/20/2007, -0/+5Whats important and what concerns people aren't always the same thing... Digg.com is built up around what concerns its users...
And yes... Big Media vs. The common Internet user is something that concerns diggers...
Are you new to this? - qpn6ph9q, on 11/20/2007, -0/+4In either case, it doesn't matter if it's one video or a hundred -- standing up for our rights to fair use will ensure Big Content does not abuse the DMCA for the purposes of censorship.
- JoelBakan01, on 11/20/2007, -0/+4No, no it wouldn't, not this time.
- MakinBacon, on 11/20/2007, -1/+5Billy Madison: Okay, a simple "wrong" would've done just fine.
- spucky, on 11/20/2007, -0/+4I've been reading through some of his older comments and now all other words look wrong. I think he just made me retarded :(
- Enfenestrate, on 11/20/2007, -0/+3I wasn't too happy with it. I love the show, but the film wasn't that great. I can see why someone wouldn't like it.
- NYC83, on 11/20/2007, -0/+3"can you please enlighten us as to how increasing popular opinion..." i guess removing negative reviews of their own movies on supposed copyright violations could be considered increasing popular opinion in some twisted fashion. if you truly believe that silencing negative reviews of their products is increasing popular opinion, well then, i really don't have an argument for you.
- GliTCH82, on 11/20/2007, -0/+3No, even worse... he's a dumbass.
- stammered, on 11/20/2007, -0/+3I did a search for reviews of the movie and this seems to be the only video that was removed. So it would appear that they really are only removing the bad reviews. As far as I can tell, at least.
- zengonzo, on 11/20/2007, -0/+3You also don't hear about the guys that haven't done well even with a record contract. They come, go and disappear.
So, ultimately, you make it or you don't - I think it is better to at least have your fate in your own hands. - DesertDude, on 11/20/2007, -1/+3You mean you don't recognize a legal notice when you see one?
- siszam, on 11/20/2007, -1/+3See what happens when public schools adopt "whole learning".
- DesertDude, on 11/20/2007, -0/+2He's just defending the movie because Fox made it. His username is RedStatePride after all. Still, would've been more convincing if he got the name right, seeing how it's only 4 letters and all.
- JohnnyRC36, on 11/20/2007, -4/+6Scumbags. I just added another company to my list of those that will never get a dime from me.
- thezettabytes, on 11/20/2007, -1/+3Whether Reno 911 deserves a bad review or not is not the point. Go back and campaign for yur local republican.
- jonthebishop, on 11/20/2007, -0/+2If Fox wasn't already on that list you need to pay more attention.
- qpn6ph9q, on 11/20/2007, -0/+2Thanks for standing up to them - every bit helps the fight to maintain what few rights we have with regards DMCA. By the way, in your article you emphasized taking clips from a pirated version of the movie. If you are taking clips from the movie for the purposes of fair use, it is not piracy. Piracy is infringing someones copyright. Fair use is not infringement. Good luck with your fight I'm cheering for you!
-
Show 51 - 100 of 109 discussions
Digg is coming to a city (and computer) near you! Check out all the details on our 
© Digg Inc. 2009
— Content created and posted by Digg users is