What is Digg?76 Comments
- digitalpoint, on 10/12/2007, -1/+103They are on the same page now after my conversation with them today. :)
- RubberbandLN6, on 10/12/2007, -1/+63You sir have some huge balls. Let this thing go to the end, then the RIAA and MPAA might realize that there are some very courageous people out there who won't back down and won't just hand over the money. You may be our only hope to stop this lawsuit rampage in its tracks.
- inactive, on 10/12/2007, -1/+57More kudos for the cajones gigantico.
- digitalpoint, on 10/12/2007, -0/+56Nah... not looking for handouts on this. Ultimately it's between me and them.
- inactive, on 10/12/2007, -0/+40This has the potential to be a landmark case ...
- musteval, on 10/12/2007, -2/+39I don't know who you are but I think you're cool. :hifive:
- ArcticRain, on 10/12/2007, -0/+33Fight the fight when you know you're right.
- digitalpoint, on 10/12/2007, -0/+32"He's" a techie for a living (runs Digital Point Solutions). http://www.google.com/search?q=digitalpoint
- dustyshadow, on 10/12/2007, -6/+37[arnold voice]
who is your daddy and what does he do
[/arnold voice] - msaleem, on 10/12/2007, -2/+32I bow before your greatness sir. Your balls. They are indeed huge. Made of steel even.
- ecahoon, on 10/12/2007, -0/+22Okay, then we should all remember to contribute to the EFF
- tek1024, on 10/12/2007, -0/+16Is it normal that I feel just this side of somewhat starstruck that we have someone on Digg who is not only anti-RidiculousCorp but has the $ and, yes, the cajones giganticos to do more than sigh about it?
- jasqwerty, on 10/12/2007, -4/+20That sounds great, when your lawyer and you are after two completely different results.
- antisthenex, on 10/12/2007, -0/+15I'm pretty sure you'd get a ton of donations, if you were to ask.
- iamSlightly, on 10/12/2007, -1/+14You're missing the point man. Yes, people get accused all the time of crimes they didn't commit - but the RIAA & MPAA are blanket-suing. They throw out a huge net and try to catch as many fish as they can. The fish may be guilty or they may be innocent. It really doesn't matter to the the accusers. Even people who have been falsely accused end up settling.
So why is this a big deal? - because he's NOT effing settling - because he's not guilty, which would set a precedent for other falsely accused victims. Perhaps after he wins (which he will - his lawyers specialize in this type of shiznit), the RIAA & MPAA will do a little more research or collect a little more evidence before they sue. They run a scare tactic, and that's makes me a sad panda. - dcte, on 10/12/2007, -0/+11Good luck with this, I'm hoping they don't back down so we can see this go all the way
- digitalpoint, on 10/12/2007, -1/+11I should point out that as many have mentioned, I'm really not trying to legalize P2P (although the concept in itself isn't illegal to begin with). My first priority is to annoying the MPAA twice as much as they have annoyed me (this could be through various channels, including educating people and helping others fight them without the legal expenses somehow). The second priority is to win the case, but that's less important to me now.
- Saintlink, on 10/12/2007, -0/+9Major props to fighting these extortionists. I've added to you to friends profile and will track any updates you post. Keep up the good work.
- ecahoon, on 10/12/2007, -0/+9Sounds like it is time to set up a legal fund...
- awa1ct, on 10/12/2007, -0/+9power to the people
+digg - dongiaconia, on 10/12/2007, -2/+11yes, it would set an excellent precedent for future RIAA extortion attempts.
- tdpimpin99, on 10/12/2007, -0/+8Really hope you win. Tired of them picking on the little people.
- twoeyes, on 10/12/2007, -0/+8Whats the big deal? If you're not an american i can understand but come on common knowlege he wins the case it can be used as a legal precedent meaning that if another case were to come along under the exact same circumstance then the judge would pretty much have his/her hands tied to rule in the same way, unless the accusing lawyer can convince him that there are differences between the cases (the other lawyer will simply have to convince they're the same case and will win the court battle in most cases right then).
- SpyDerMann, on 10/12/2007, -0/+7Someone give this guy a Microsoft case.
- toad3k, on 10/12/2007, -0/+7Consider your blog bookmarked.
- yagoogaly, on 10/12/2007, -0/+7The power of digg compels you!
- DaffyDuck, on 10/12/2007, -0/+6Yeah, it's normal. Good luck Shawn Hogan. I hope your case sets a positive precident.
- f00xx0riz3r, on 10/12/2007, -0/+6It's not like Shawn isnt already asking for donations.. http://www.digitalpoint.com/tools/donate.html
- N3wtR0ckn13, on 10/12/2007, -0/+6http://www.subpoenadefense.org/ kinda similar to what he suggested
- wtf00, on 10/12/2007, -0/+6thats reason big corp know they go after these people because most of them don't have the money fight back so they settle to get them off there backs.
- simeonb, on 10/12/2007, -0/+6It could, because it will set precedent. It will expose how they would go about taking something like this all the way to the end, and it will expose that it is possible for them to lose. They will be forced to show real evidence, and we will see how it hold up in court. If they drop the case, it will send a signal that they back down if people stand up for themselves, and other people will have an easier time doing that. It puts them in a very awkward position when they aren't able to overpower someone with lawyers and money. I think it goes beyond the MPAA and RIAA and is valuable to technology lawsuits between big companies and individuals in general. Did they verify that the ip they recorded was used by who they say it was at the time they say it was? Did they look at the contents of the file or just the file name. These are frail but basic arguments that they use to intimidate people.
- iamSlightly, on 10/12/2007, -1/+6"The RIAA isn't blanket suing, they are going by IP addresses and they have his his IP address confirmed for p2p downloading. That's like your car being spotted as the getaway car for a bank robbery." - Ummm, not so much, no. IP Addresses don't prove anything. Especially if you are on a large network or have unsecured wireless. I guess it would be like my car being spotted if I shared the same license plate w/ 100 other people. It'd be a different story if they had his MAC address.
Yes, he is defending himself, which is the great thing here - not everyone has the funds, time, contacts, etc to defend themselves, and the MPAA knows that. Their whole defense lies on an IP address and a filename, which aint exactly "rock-solid" evidence. As for this reinforcing the RIAA's case, I don't know what algorithm you used to come up w/ that statement - any loss for a company as a plaintiff can't be good news. - mrrbob, on 10/12/2007, -0/+5Shawn Hogan is not a somewhat rich guy. Just go read his blog about the house he is building, look on the right under categories then click on "House Stuff". About the law suite kick their ass Shawn, way to go. I know you can afford to do this on your own but I tell you, this is something I would donate money for just because I would like to be a part of it. Consider placing a "donate here" button on your blog so I can participate. Maybe others would also?
- FlyboyP, on 10/12/2007, -0/+4The really great thing you are doing is standing up to the extorting 300 lb bully that scares everybody else. Anyone else without your resources has to roll over and settle.
And the long-term damage you could do to their extortion scheme with funded and organized resistance is phenomenal. - hotdrop, on 10/12/2007, -0/+4Fight the power, I hope this guy really sticks it to em. After its over he should run for public office there really need to be more senators and congressmen that dont bend over backwards to big $$$
- dezmd, on 10/12/2007, -1/+5as a fellow 26 year old techie, go to your about page and update your 'ceo' profile with a more professional personal history blurb. for the love of god. oh and kill the caption. and put on a suit! conform damn you! CONFORRRRRRM!
And keep up the good work, don't let the MPAA get an ounce of enjoyment. The longer you stall and/or fight them, the more their $500/hr law firm bills them. Just don't lose, then you could very well be liable for their attorneys' fees.
cheers. - NJank, on 10/12/2007, -1/+5people aren't claiming that it will legitimize illegal p2p. they are claiming that it will set a precedent that can be used to show that the shotgun tactics being used in generating these lawsuits are lacking the burden of evidence to survive a civil court case. That could affect the overall picture of these lawsuits.
- Greg-J, on 10/12/2007, -1/+4.
They really did pick the wrong guy to go after. This 'brave soul' is Shawn Hogan. Much in the same way you would call someone like James Bond a "Man's Man", Shawn would be considered a "Webmaster's Webmaster". He's the founder of DigitalPoint.com and one of the most successful webmasters around. He created the CO-OP network for pete's sake. Good luck Shawn, we're rooting for you!
-Greg-J
. - n00854180t, on 10/12/2007, -0/+3After they set precedent that the RIAA/MPAA have little or NO evidence in these cases (many of which are targeted at people that don't even have computers, for instance), I'm guessing more judges will throw out frivolous RIAA/MPAA suits.
- digitalpoint, on 10/12/2007, -0/+3Uhm... I don't personally have the legal knowledge, just so there is no confusion there... I'm certainly not a lawyer.
- iamSlightly, on 10/12/2007, -1/+4Dude, I never said he was a hero, nor did he (Shawn). I do think he deserves props for fighting this lawsuit to clear his name. In my opinion, this isn't about whether P2P to distribute copyrighted material is legal or legitimate - it's about standing up to the big companies that falsely accuse.
"UM, So you think innocent people should be punished for crimes they didn't commit rather than make the prosecution and in turn the public look bad?" - On the contrary - in fact, that was my entire point. If the MPAA/RIAA sue him and lose, they will look tarnished, which is not good for the MPAA/RIAA; although I'm not sure how that makes the public look bad, as you claim.
I guess we can agree to disagree on this one. You're still my bff. - streetstealth, on 10/12/2007, -2/+5To the other posters: I appreciate the spirit, but is all this testicular imagery really necessary? :)
To our DigitalPoint crusader: best wishes; give 'em hell! - schroeder, on 10/12/2007, -0/+3The point is that, whether Hogan cares or not, this case will help set precedent for cases similar to his own ( for example Patti Santangelo's case http://p2pnet.net/story/7419 and others i don't care to research right now ) Instances where no crime was committed, but on shoddy evidence the MPAA/RIAA are suing and destroying lives of innocent people. That's what makes this case notable. These organizations are pulling IPs out of the air to scare people out of file-sharing all the while forcing innocent people to foot the bill. It is extortion and this case may show the courts that their suits never had a leg to stand on and force them in the future to provide real evidence and accuse real criminals.
- iamSlightly, on 10/12/2007, -0/+2good luck bro.
- mwales, on 10/12/2007, -1/+3It's good to see someone have the balls (and ability / funds) to stand up to these guys. I'm sure some of the people they targeted did infringe, but I also feel some (like yourself) have been wrongly accused. It's nice to finally see them run into someone who isn't willing to just rollover.
Will you be able to recoup your expenses related to this when you beat them? - anon52, on 10/12/2007, -0/+2I don’t and won’t pay to download commercialized music. There is so much good stuff out there by independent artists that need listening to - why does everyone flock to the labels’ offerings?
I suggest that he sets up a way for the public to make donations to his defense. I understand that he has the money to defend himself, but the message would be a whole lot stronger if 100, 1000, 10000 people all gave a $ to stick it to the corporations. Let's send the @ssholes a message that we'll find another source for our entertainment - and they won't be part of it. - wizpig64, on 10/12/2007, -0/+2I have a friend of a friend who also was falsely accused of downloading a movie as well. He got a letter in the mail from someone saying they were the MPAA. Rather than just paying the $X they asked him for, he went on to get a lawyer and finding out that the letter itself was forged by some phishing people. I hope no one else falls for those jerks.
Good luck. Heck, if you win you could probably counter sue for the money you lost. ;D - kloud213, on 10/12/2007, -1/+3I just want to say rite on man. you are my hero, make them suffer when they back down and counter sue them for legal fees. they are all spineless bastards.
- iamSlightly, on 10/12/2007, -0/+2Well stated friend.
- FunkyGuy, on 10/12/2007, -1/+3good luck man, time to get your name in history books!
-
Show 51 - 76 of 76 discussions
© Digg Inc. 2009
— Content created and posted by Digg users is