What is Digg?36 Comments
- deadowl, on 10/11/2007, -4/+24Well, I guess that's what happens to anything Yahoo touches. They also get you arrested if you live in communist China.
- ptsd, on 10/11/2007, -6/+25yahoo and flickr are in the business to make money not to support free speech.
they can not make money in germany if they are banned from germany
if germans want an end to the censorship, they should change their laws before they complain and protest to flickr.
now digg me down. - Serra1, on 10/11/2007, -5/+18"yahoo and flickr are in the business to make money not to support free speech."
Free speech has nothing to do with business. flickr isn't denying anyone free speech. Anyone can post their image on the Internet, they don't need flickr to do that. flickr is a business and is trying to conform to the laws of the countries where they are being viewed. Nobody likes that flickr is doing that, but they can't break the law in any country.
flickr is not censoring anyone. They are conforming to the law. - HunterTV, on 10/11/2007, -4/+13Nah, it's just what happens when a big company buys out the little guy. It almost without fail turns to ***** in short order.
- TimeMaster, on 10/11/2007, -0/+5Yep... Big company, no morals.
If you think the cencorship is getting bad now, wait till internet2 becomes the standard! - speerross, on 10/11/2007, -0/+4@Serra1
I won't go in to the ins and outs of this debate and german law too much now becuase I simply don't know enough but this grinds my gears so to speak:
"flickr is not censoring anyone. They are conforming to the law."
If the law supports censorship then Flickr IS censoring people, they're just doing it with the legal support of the government. This makes it legal, it doesn't make it RIGHT. And from what I've read here, the compliance with german law thing is just *****, but I'd like to hear more about that. - mulling, on 10/11/2007, -7/+11Adam Lasnik says exactly what I've been thinking:
"Thomas... I can't find a way to write this kindly yet effectively: It's time for you to grow up.
I've sat back for ages and watched you -- the CEO of a site directly competitive with Flickr -- bash Flickr, whine about Flickr, grandstand about your site in comparison with Flickr.
Chill out. Personally, I refuse and likely will continue to refuse to check out your service because I'm aghast at your unprofessionalism, immaturity, and shockingly bad judgment.
Repeat after me: It's rude and counterproductive to bash your competitors, not to mention so frequently and vociferously.
If you're tired of Flickr, cancel your account and get on with your life.
Personally -- despite the fact that I work for a competitor of Yahoo -- I'm hugely annoyed by the mob mentality over on Flickr. It's been clear to me for ages that Stewart and his team really care about their service, really care about their users, and indeed are doing the best they can to do the right thing.
If it weren't for them having to calm angry, irrational, hysterical mobs every few weeks, they might actually get more work done.
And on a similar note, if you worried less about what your competitors did and more about scaling your own business, you might not be so frequently breaking launch promises and such.
Consider this tough love, Thomas. I don't know you, I've never met you, and I have no urge to see you fail. But until someone actually gives you a virtual spanking and tells you to shut up and get back to work, I fear you're going to cluelessly continue your unproductive whining... to the detriment of yourself and the great annoyance of those of us who continue to run into your rants on techmeme."
http://thomashawk.com/2007/06/update-on-censorship-problem-on-flickr.html#8789082116872486627 - speerross, on 10/11/2007, -0/+4Well if you're unhappy with the service then its your right as a customer to complain and try and get things changed. Flickr is a wonderful tool and service, its userbase is loyal in that it hasn't defected yet it's trying to get thing changed for the better instead of just letting this good thing go down the *****. We repay them by earning them ***** of money, I'm quite happy to also repay them by kicking up a fuss when they make a dick move.
- Drevor, on 10/11/2007, -1/+5@Serra1 (#7231626) said: flickr is not censoring anyone. They are conforming to the law."
in fact they are not conforming to the german law as they do not filter content that is illegal in germany and do not add parental control metadata to their content. In addition the flickr.de website misses some crucial information that every commercial site has to provide. For more information read the linked topic at the flickr forum - eean, on 10/11/2007, -4/+8Sounds like the various government's fault. Flickr is a big target for governments, so they have to be more careful.
- adjective, on 10/11/2007, -4/+7I don't know why everyone is going ape on Flickr, Flickr is owned by Yahoo, Flickr is just adhering to Yahoo-- and Yahoo is following the law. Flickr/Yahoo is in little area to actually move against what is going on. I'm supposing that if they didn't Germany would probably do something. Why aren't these people protesting against their governments? Isn't that what they usually do? I'm sure Yahoo and Flickr over in those countries might be talking to the government about it, but there's little only one office can do. Why can't the citizens of these countries who are outraged channel that rage to some more productive means?
If Yahoo and Flickr are abiding by government set LAWS, they aren't doing anything wrong. It's the government people should be angry at.
Also, I'm a proud Flickr user. I have many friends who work at Flickr who are stressed out about what's going on. There's little they can do-- they know it's a problem, but it's not like they can change it. I believe most of them are getting spammed by the anti-censor people in their photo comments, too. Which really shows.. a lot. (Childish) - djackmanson, on 10/11/2007, -10/+13I'm in Australia, I don't work for flickr, Zoomr, or any other photo-sharing company, and I'm pretty annoyed.
Here's my YouTube vid reporting on the whole situation:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=UTh0JhzWssw
LOTS of people on flickr are annoyed:
http://www.flickr.com/groups/againstcensorship/discuss/
Even though many of them are not that impressed with Zoomr:
http://www.flickr.com/groups/againstcensorship/discuss/72157600370480234/ - dbr_onix, on 10/11/2007, -3/+6This is silly..
"tried to argue that censorship on Flickr could not be considered censorship because we agree to terms of service on the site. That's lame. I think rather than trying to dismiss this as not being censorship when it very much is"
So, if an image goes against the ToS and it's removed, it's oh-so-evil censorship?
Yes, techincally removing images is more-or-less censorship - But it's no different than a "blogger" removing comments full of links to Viagra-sale-websites - If Flickr removing photos/comments that violate it's ToS, or removing a bunch of completely-grey images from the interesting photos queue (After they explained that the "protest" images were removed because it was disrupting "normal" users experience - Wanting to see photos instead of thousands of "FLICKR IS CENSORING THIS SITE!" images is understandable..) is censorship, then removing spam or flooding comments is too..
Of course, not allowing users in those countries to see "non-safe" images is screwed up, and should be rectified, but it's possible to complain about it without flooding the Interesting-pictures-pages with graphical, complaining then they are removed then retorting by flooding it again with even less interesting images..
Allowing users to view the "unsafe" images if their profile says they are over 18 (or 21, or whatever age they need to be) should be enough - There's no way you can ever be sure of someones age online, using the supplied birth-date is the best you will be able to do - If they lie about that, they could lie their way around pretty much any safeguards you put in place.. - fuzzmeister, on 10/11/2007, -0/+2That is actually pretty ironic for you to say that. Ron Paul is a libertarian, and supports decreased government controls on businesses. Therefore, he would be the _least_ likely to do anything about this. Realistically, though, no one would, as Flickr can do what they want on their site.
- Typhoon2009, on 10/11/2007, -2/+3Agreed. Sorry to the Germans, but if they want to change this they have to complain to their government.
If they're anything like us Americans though, they'll just bitch about it on their blogs instead of actually doing something. If you want to change something, you have to do it. You can't just whine and hope the government decides to cooperate. - spankaccount, on 10/10/2007, -0/+1Flickr has bigger issues. Like Comment whores
http://www.digg.com/design/Comment_Whores_are_determined_to_totally_F_up_Flickr - undercoverhippo, on 10/11/2007, -3/+4boo hoo... Why aren't people in Germany and the other countries outraged at their own governments for imposing such strict laws? Why take it out on Flickr who is only trying to stay legit in those countries?
These are the same type of hippies who live on soy milk and protest at G8 meetings. - djackmanson, on 10/11/2007, -2/+2Flickr and Yahoo are co-operating - happily - with censorship. In fact, they are even over-co-operating. It's one thing doing what you are forced to do, and another thing to bring in rules that do not even work.
If Flickr and Yahoo's shareholders had any guts they would not have voted down the anti-censorship policy at their recent meeting:
http://blog.zooomr.com/2007/06/13/zooomrs-stand-on-censorship/
But they didn't, so they are the enemy of free expression, so we have every right to criticise them. There are always people who say 'there is no point' in complaining and protesting, but refusing to put up with a bad situation is what gets things changed. Not sneering at those who care
Even though I am linking to an article on the Zoomr blog, I should say that I have decided to use Ipernity as my main photo-sharing site for a while. I'll be taking almost all my photos off flickr and won't be renewing my pro account when it runs out. I'm also going to do my best to make sure that people hear of alternatives to Yahoo's Flickr. - gdragon, on 10/11/2007, -1/+1No need to digg you down because many flickr users have made the same statement, and it's a good one. German laws are very unclear about what is allowed and what is not. Flickr had no choice but to interpret those laws on the conservative side. If German users want flickr to change, they need to push their own government to make the laws more clear.
The entire protest thing is silly anyway. All flickr is doing is limiting access to nude photos in some countrys. Most photo sharing sites wont allow nude images at all. If people don't like how flickr does things, they should use another site instead of crying about it. - chibaken, on 10/11/2007, -4/+4Doesn't this guy think the Yahoo/Google lawyers aren't on top of this This isn't some 3 page blog were talking about here any more, it's now a fully operational business, regardless if it consists of my hard worked 438 photos or his prized collection of kitten and tulip pictures. Flickr felt like they were infringing on international law (not only Germany but other countries) and they've made a decision on it. As Tex says, it's their site. If you don't like it....
Maybe they should have been a little more candid about it, but the response is unjustified.
Naive... - inactive, on 10/11/2007, -5/+5Damn... and I was just starting to gain a little exposure on flickr.
Well, time to move on, I suppose. - Drevor, on 10/11/2007, -2/+2@Typhoon2009 (#7232322) said: "Agreed. Sorry to the Germans, but if they want to change this they have to complain to their government.
The currently censored content has nothing to do with german law. Since there is no porn (read: intercourse) on flickr all they are required by law is to add metadata according to the w3c PICS standard to every non-safe image. Again, the currently employed blunt and unjustified censorship has nothing to do with german law.
Content that actually IS needed to be filtered is not affected by their filter as these images are not "unsafe" by US standards (eg nazi propaganda)
Flickr and in extend does not honor german law or its users. Take a stand, your country could be next. - etnu, on 10/11/2007, -3/+2You can probably argue that Flickr might be able to get away with images that are being censored, and you might even be right. The problem, though, is that Yahoo has already gone through legal battles over censorship in the EU, and has lost a lot of money in the process. Their lawyers deemed the risk unacceptable.
Honestly, if you don't like it you really need to petition the governments of these countries, and work towards real change. Bitching about how Yahoo/Google/whomever is censoring you is really easy to do when you're a company that doesn't even have a legal presence (or a user base...) in the affected country to begin with. Your tune will change the minute that first lawsuit hits you (or, in some countries, the minute your employees are arrested and jailed).
Now, don't misunderstand. I wish the companies would fight these laws harder -- but we can't expect them to. They're businesses, and as businesses they must obey the law. Encourage these companies to push for changes to the laws (something which, I might add, Yahoo HAS been doing), and push yourself. - missingnoh4x, on 10/11/2007, -3/+2There seems to be no background on what exactly is going on with Flickr that this is an update to, and I can't figure out what the author is talking about here. Something about Flickr doing something in Germany that people are calling censorship and they're denying it. Can somebody fill me in here?
- FascistNation, on 10/11/2007, -2/+1Now if there is only some way to make German legiscritters and their subordinate minions pay ... huuuummmm.
- cryptoki, on 02/01/2008, -2/+1Ok.. so what again is deemed as a non safe image?, and what rights should we have in this scenario?
- poxoe, on 10/11/2007, -2/+1Censorship sucks!!!
Btw, if you want you may post any porn pics here at http://PickyPorn.com (Th Digg-Like Social Porn Network) - sadilak, on 10/11/2007, -4/+2Picasaweb.google.com
- dgblackout, on 10/11/2007, -4/+2ron paul should be buried as lame.
- Texanguy4534533, on 10/11/2007, -6/+3its there site let them do what they want don't like it go somewhere else. you don't own flickr they provide a service for YOU and this is how u repay them?
- Titan486, on 10/11/2007, -8/+5@HunterTV, no, its what happens when a national government tells you not to do something because its against their laws
- hellaunknown, on 10/11/2007, -3/+0lol. you are getting digg ups. haha. i was one of dem =]
- spaceman77, on 10/11/2007, -8/+4I say all of us Flickr users massively defect to Zoomr or another online photo sharing site.
I am emptying out and abandoning my flickr account now! - insanebrain, on 10/11/2007, -5/+0Flickr is so gay ;)
- alexhenderson1, on 10/11/2007, -6/+1www.picli.com FTW imho
- Jakerius, on 10/11/2007, -16/+7The guy is the CEO of Zooomr, what more is this than anti-competitive propaganda? When I see it from a Flickr blogger that isn't part of either company speak up, I'll start caring, but until the Flickr users take their bitching out of the comments and into a protest, what's the point? (+10 if it's Scott Beale that launches the protest)
© Digg Inc. 2009
— Content created and posted by Digg users is