What is Digg?Sponsored by Activision
Band Hero view!
guitarhero.com - The biggest event music event of the year is now in your living room.
51 Comments
- acetv, on 10/12/2007, -0/+32When hyperlinking becomes illegal we have lost the internet.
- lkmbrd, on 10/12/2007, -0/+24I'd blog about this but I'm afraid of the potential consequences.
- inspecality, on 10/12/2007, -1/+17That's so yesterday.
- PPoff, on 10/12/2007, -0/+141) Wrong, the purpose of an LLC is to limit the liability to the company and not let it get to you or your family personally. (e.g. you get sued and lose and thus only lose the business instead of all your personal assets).
2) I agree, sending C&D letters without a legitimate reason (Insert Magic # here) can get you sued, but a good faith letter cant. - arbulus, on 10/12/2007, -1/+9how about ramen bloggers?
- deesine, on 10/12/2007, -0/+8You do know what the word 'law' means, right?
- zebstah, on 10/12/2007, -1/+9#13 Don't take legal advice from some random directory website.
- scotticus, on 10/12/2007, -5/+12I'd blog about it, but I'm not a loser.
Except I am. I just don't have a blog. - blogstar, on 10/12/2007, -1/+8Or the "Internets" as they seem to like to call it down in Washington....
- Brss45, on 10/12/2007, -0/+7you wouldn't happen to have a copy that you could email me, would you?
i hear it's a big file, but i'd like my own copy of the internets. - mlfoley, on 10/12/2007, -0/+6I hear that there are laws on the series of tubes.
- strangewill, on 10/12/2007, -1/+6TBH: It's ***** laws like this that makes me just wanna host my blog in the UK...
No deep linking? WTF? Program your web servers if you don't want it, as for the rest of us, it's how the internet was designed to work. - hockey, on 10/12/2007, -1/+5Law 14. 99% of the Internet doesn't care about your blog.
- dave292, on 10/12/2007, -0/+2A good general background to understanding can be had by reading "I.T. Wars: Managing the Business-Technology Weave in the New Millennium." In fact, the Business-Technology Weave is gaining ground as the first documented and defined eCulture - replacing the old-school "corporate culture" - about time, when you think about it. Pretty cool - you can Google "I.T. Wars"
- toomuchpete, on 10/12/2007, -1/+3It is amazingly in depth, though it doesn't seem to be particularly accurate. They identified a lot of good issues that bloggers should be concerned about, but nobody should rely in any way, shape, or form on their interpretations of what the law is. (Of course, nobody should really rely on the interpretations of law by anyone whose credentials they aren't familiar with.)
- Seph7, on 10/12/2007, -0/+2http://duggmirror.com
- ConceptJunkie, on 10/12/2007, -0/+2Don't hate laws. Laws are what separate us from animals. Just hate bad laws and those people who abuse the legal system for fun and profit.
The sad thing, while we are drowning in laws, the Rule of Law itself is becoming increasingly irrelevant. I don't know about other Americans, but to me that sounds more like Soviet Russia than the greatest country in the world. - ConceptJunkie, on 10/12/2007, -0/+2@zebstah:
And how much of our national productivity does the 97% of cases that don't go to trial eat up? Litigation, and to a much greater degree, fear of litigation is hammering this country's productivity. Don't forget an entire industry devoted to the interpretation, circumvention and just plain old compliance of the elephantine U.S. code, especially the tax code, which is, by the government's own admission far more complex than any person can apprehend. Compliance with the law, especially if you are a business, is an enormous cost that our friends, the whores in Congress, never seem to consider.
You can quote statistics, most of which I still find scary, all you want, but we are lawyering ourselves to death. - dacheetah, on 10/12/2007, -1/+3Interesting article, not that any of it directly affects me given my not being in the US, and as such not being under the jurisdiction of US law.
- klown256, on 10/12/2007, -6/+7An amazingly in depth article that discusses many of the laws most lamen bloggers like us have a difficult time finding.
- findhostcoupons, on 03/21/2009, -0/+1Thanks for sharing these rules with us!
- meshman, on 10/12/2007, -0/+1You have nothing to worry about. Everybody loves lamen.
- JavaKnight, on 10/12/2007, -1/+2Extremely useful article
- zebstah, on 10/12/2007, -2/+3Lawyer nation? As opposed to what? Doctor nation? Teacher nation? CEO nation?
I bet you that most of your notions of the legal system are wrong. I bet most of your understanding of the statistics behind it are wrong.
For example, did you know that U.S. litigation rates have grown far more slowly than the economy over the past two decades. Comparative studies show that there is a direct link between economic activity and population and litigation rates - yet our caseload is lagging behind.
Did you know that of the 91 million cases, 3/5 are traffic and other minor ordinance violations. Only 16% of those 91 million cases are of the type that most people think about when they say "lawyer nation": civil cases. Did you know only about 3% of all cases go to trial?
Did you know that the median recovery in tort cases (the kind people complain about and that get exaggerated when someone wins a few million from McDonalds) is only $31,000. Did you know that only 49% of the time plaintiffs win in tort trials? Did you know that less than 5% of civil trials in which plaintiffs win nets a verdict greater than $1million?
You need to use common sense. The guy suing for $60 million for his pants is not going to win. He's wasting his own time and money, so let him. The situation is not as grave as you think.
Note: stats are generally from the DOJ as found in Civil Procedure by Yeazell. - dacheetah, on 10/12/2007, -0/+1Yes, I do know where my server is...
The worst they could do if I did break any US laws while "blogging" to a US server is take the blog down, and then I can just put it up elsewhere. (Or host my own) - ConceptJunkie, on 10/12/2007, -0/+1> Of course, nobody should really rely on the interpretations of law by anyone whose credentials they aren't familiar with.
Especially since interpretation of the law is often subject to the politics of the judge in question. How else do you think our rights have been eroded so egregiously. Well, that and an out of control Congress and Executive Branch. Face it, no one is on our side. Well, unless you're a pedophile or cop killer and then the ACLU might help you. - WTFukowi, on 10/12/2007, -3/+4Welcome to lawyer nation. There's a lawyer in Seattle (I think) who is suing a dry cleaner for $60 million for losing his pants. Everytime you notice a bass-ackwards situation somewhere in America: The flying Imans trying to sue the passengers who complained about them, government workers who can't get fired, psychopathic students who can't be thrown out of school, for example, you can be sure that there are lawyers behind it.
The House just passed a law by the way that would prevent lawsuits against people who report suspicious terror activities. Sounds like a good idea, right? Our first line of defense here at home, right? 116 Democrats (can you say TRIAL LAWYERS ASSN) voted against the law. Check it out. Google Peter King, Republican rep who sponsored the bill. - markus941, on 10/12/2007, -0/+1I own this comment. Copyright me 2007.
- unco, on 10/12/2007, -1/+2its 2 o´clock in the morning .. do you KNOW where your servers are?
- masskurec, on 03/04/2009, -0/+0very informative stuff
http://xptweak.net - fixyourthinking, on 10/12/2007, -1/+1I'm surprised The Lanham Act was not discussed as it is the most relevant to the majority of blogs that would be involved in legal matters.
The Lanham Act covers freedom of the press through "ALL FORMS of news and news commentary" - anneofavonlea, on 10/12/2007, -1/+1Good article. Thanks for posting it!
- daleng, on 10/12/2007, -0/+0Every blogger should read this.
- marshaldan, on 10/10/2007, -0/+0Thanks for this information ~ I didn't realize how little I knew about this vital subject!
- crossers, on 07/15/2008, -0/+0of course laws good, but when we keep them! this article is good and useful!
http://www.shpe-sac.org
http://www.ocflex.com/
http://www.trgovinca.org
http://www.chasr.org/ - laffarsmith, on 10/10/2007, -0/+0Actually Markus, according to the below posted "Creative Commons Public Domain License" your comment is public domain, we all own it. :-p
Thanks for the informative post. I knew most of this from researching it when I hosted gaming websites but I'd let my structures slide a little with my blogs. This post came to me as a timely reminded to tighten up loose ends and double check my own local legal standings. - ROTUS, on 11/18/2007, -0/+0Read it or weep!
- Yoltocom, on 03/10/2008, -0/+0Exhaustive. :)
- crash128, on 10/12/2007, -2/+1@zeb: Kelo, hate speech, Michigan affirmative action, males ruined in divorce proceedings, immigration lawyers, Martha Stewart (out of control DA's), Bush's illegal wiretaps (violating fisa), venue shopping, strong-arm plea bargains to avoid costly trials, Duke LAX.
I can't believe there's some ***** (that would be you) who would even attempt to defend the U.S. system of "justice". It's broken, dude. Although I can only imagine that you make money off of it in some way. - christopheles, on 10/12/2007, -4/+3Some same-old-same-old but also some real surprises.
Dugg. - tjfloyd24517, on 10/12/2007, -1/+0i hate laws
- form3hide, on 10/12/2007, -2/+1Trademarks.
The domain name I wanted was taken by a domain squatter. So, I simply bought the .net version. A few years later, I decided to trademark the name. Now, do I have any claim to the .com version of my trademark? Being that the .com version is just a squatting site, do I have any justification for seeking a lawyer? - Cyraq, on 10/12/2007, -3/+1***** Laws.
http://hd-dvd-key.com - NomenNescio, on 10/12/2007, -3/+1Rule number 13: rules are made to be broken.
- chrismgtis, on 10/12/2007, -2/+0"NEVER allow criminal comments or stolen content to remain on one of your sites. Users may complain that you’re stifling their free speech, but when it all boils down you simply cannot afford to be sued."
There you have it, idiots of Digg. - krached, on 10/12/2007, -7/+4I take a couple of issues with the content of the article.
First, the idea of forming an LLC as a blogger seems rather pointless. The corporate form will not protect a person from something they did to incur liability, it really only protects a person from the torts of their employees and partners. Since most bloggers seem to be lone operations, I see no need to go through the hassle.
Second, when it comes to copyright, sending a cease and desist letter can have consequences. If it is strong enough, it might allow the other party to sue the sender. The sender of that letter can end up in a forum they would prefer not to be in. - diggometer, on 10/12/2007, -5/+1I wonder who has the right to say these are the laws and you have to abide by them. Why don't they let the blogging society to choose and decide the laws?
- OBKenobi, on 10/12/2007, -8/+3I'll let my lawyer worry about it.
This is my lawyer:
http://leatheroaks.org/Rubber/Base/IMG_1999a.JPG - Kyan, on 10/12/2007, -7/+1I choose calling it "blog spam" and bury you.
- fearlessfx, on 10/12/2007, -9/+3I wonder how many users are going to be tempted to put a certain number here.
© Digg Inc. 2009
— Content created and posted by Digg users is 