Digg getting shut down only causes a problem to DIGG. Everyone else will jump ship to some one else. Why do people really care? Do you depend on Digg for anything? It used to benefit me because of the programming stories that popped up, but not it's just pop-culture BS spun by groups with their own propaganda (including the owners of this site)
If someone posted my bank account number on Digg, they wouldn't go to jail for it no matter how much money it cost me. I might be able to sue, but I am certainly not protected by law. Why is a decryption key protected by law but not my bank account number?
This forum is full of early adopters. I say that if they go after Digg we boycott. I'm not sure who we boycott but maybe just boycott HD-DVD all together.
I think there is a more fundamental question that needs to be asked. Is this number even protected by copyright? If not, then how does the DMCA even apply? It seems more likely to be a trade secret and if that is the case then arguably the secret was out long before it was posted on Digg. As a result, the posting on Digg did not cause any damages. Damages are an essential element to any lawsuit. Without damages, you cannot sustain an action in court. It appears that AACS has no damages from this posting as the number already exists on 600,000+ locations on the Internet according to Google.
[quote]Too often Digg promotes disregard for the law in the name of civil rights, etc., when in fact only a youthful disdain for all authority is at the heart of the matter.[/quote]"Youthful" disdain? I don't know about you buddy, but the older I get, the *more* I reject authority. And reject it we should, when anyone presumesto do anything other than protect their own rights (which don't, btw, include prohibiting distribution of a short hex string) or the rights ofothers.
You've all put Digg in legal jeopardy because you just HAD to post something that legally and morally dubious, and even after the site tried to protect itself by removing the dangerous items, you just HAD to rebel and force the issue upon them. You've made Rose chose between the support of his site's community and protecting his company from being shut down. Your desire to post this material which you oughtn't have has put this whole community at risk. And NOW you're all suddenly interested in saving it? You've already made your choice. Don't pretend like you care about Digg more than your own petty stands against The Man. Just please please PLEASE: if Digg gets sued into oblivion and can no longer support itself, please don't flock to reddit. They've got a less retarded community and I'd hate to see all you schmucks go over there and f**k it up for them too.
Step1. Steal Underpants - oooppps wrong plan1. Move digg code to new domain, technically change ownership to Kevins cat or something.2. ?3. Digg lives on.
you can't "mirror" a social news site. You can copy one, but the databases will not coincide, and so everyone will need to start new accounts, the stories submitted and dugg to the front page will be different, and most of all, it won't be digg.com!
stratman05May 7, 2007
Digg getting shut down only causes a problem to DIGG. Everyone else will jump ship to some one else. Why do people really care? Do you depend on Digg for anything? It used to benefit me because of the programming stories that popped up, but not it's just pop-culture BS spun by groups with their own propaganda (including the owners of this site)
angeldiggsitMay 7, 2007
If someone posted my bank account number on Digg, they wouldn't go to jail for it no matter how much money it cost me. I might be able to sue, but I am certainly not protected by law. Why is a decryption key protected by law but not my bank account number?
robartMay 7, 2007
This forum is full of early adopters. I say that if they go after Digg we boycott. I'm not sure who we boycott but maybe just boycott HD-DVD all together.
mhiiMay 7, 2007
I think there is a more fundamental question that needs to be asked. Is this number even protected by copyright? If not, then how does the DMCA even apply? It seems more likely to be a trade secret and if that is the case then arguably the secret was out long before it was posted on Digg. As a result, the posting on Digg did not cause any damages. Damages are an essential element to any lawsuit. Without damages, you cannot sustain an action in court. It appears that AACS has no damages from this posting as the number already exists on 600,000+ locations on the Internet according to Google.
mindcrimeMay 7, 2007
[quote]Too often Digg promotes disregard for the law in the name of civil rights, etc., when in fact only a youthful disdain for all authority is at the heart of the matter.[/quote]"Youthful" disdain? I don't know about you buddy, but the older I get, the *more* I reject authority. And reject it we should, when anyone presumesto do anything other than protect their own rights (which don't, btw, include prohibiting distribution of a short hex string) or the rights ofothers.
porcelainpengooMay 7, 2007
You've all put Digg in legal jeopardy because you just HAD to post something that legally and morally dubious, and even after the site tried to protect itself by removing the dangerous items, you just HAD to rebel and force the issue upon them. You've made Rose chose between the support of his site's community and protecting his company from being shut down. Your desire to post this material which you oughtn't have has put this whole community at risk. And NOW you're all suddenly interested in saving it? You've already made your choice. Don't pretend like you care about Digg more than your own petty stands against The Man. Just please please PLEASE: if Digg gets sued into oblivion and can no longer support itself, please don't flock to reddit. They've got a less retarded community and I'd hate to see all you schmucks go over there and f**k it up for them too.
tercMay 7, 2007
"Fix one of our laws"Seems like a much better solution to me.
ktarrMay 8, 2007
Step1. Steal Underpants - oooppps wrong plan1. Move digg code to new domain, technically change ownership to Kevins cat or something.2. ?3. Digg lives on.
tercMay 8, 2007
you can't "mirror" a social news site. You can copy one, but the databases will not coincide, and so everyone will need to start new accounts, the stories submitted and dugg to the front page will be different, and most of all, it won't be digg.com!