What is Digg?72 Comments
- Bricks, on 10/10/2007, -2/+66Viacom - new home to hot pirate on pirate action.
- DashofPanache, on 10/10/2007, -3/+51I don't think Viacom will think this is the Best Week Ever...
- kidlinux, on 10/10/2007, -0/+41An eaerlier post of this is still on the front page of the technology section ffs. Digg needs a feature where different articles on the same story can be posted under the same digg, users could then be the ones who indicate dupes and the original digg they should fall under.
- mattfugitive, on 10/10/2007, -1/+28Ummm.. yarrr?
- Lenny, on 10/10/2007, -0/+19This has already been posted, but I'll admit, this version is better written/more informative.
- Waskonator, on 10/10/2007, -3/+18possibly < possibility
Ars-backwards linguish. - captainkeene, on 10/10/2007, -0/+14Thats America folks. When you do it, its piracy. When corporations do it, its creativity.
- mackchacky, on 10/10/2007, -0/+11I hope this guy and Youtube nail Viacom to the ***** wall.
- BobOki, on 10/10/2007, -0/+10While Viacom is being little turds, the real highlight of the show is the DMCA and its ready to abuse powers! It showcases that the DMCA works only for the companies, is not fair and balanced, and overall needs to be completely scraped.
Of course companies need something to help protect their media, but a cart blanche hammer of media justice is not it. - wing05, on 10/10/2007, -0/+9In capitalist America, Viacom owns you.
- kingo, on 10/10/2007, -3/+9Not everyone spends so much ***** time reading DIGG! Wake up and get a life.
- tonytopper, on 10/10/2007, -1/+7This is the kind of ***** that boils my blood, but you know who's going to do anything about it?
Also, last time I read the YouTube ToS, you are pretty much giving YouTube/Google the Video to do whatever it wants with it. For all we know YouTube could have given the video to Viacom for a bowl of Meow Mix.
How about all you complaining people stop watching Viacom's movies. Go here to a list of their brands. http://www.viacom.com/OUR%20BRANDS/BRAND%20INDEX/default.aspx
Stop Watching! Go for a walk, we're all getting too fat anyway. - deathsquadx, on 10/10/2007, -1/+7You're an idiot...
- BobOki, on 10/10/2007, -2/+8I've always heard it bass akwards as well.....
- Lotheron, on 10/10/2007, -1/+6Are you suggesting YouTube is public domain? I seriously hope not.
- pigfister, on 10/10/2007, -2/+7Is this not just American hypocritical philosophy that has happened?
"its ok for us to do it" - socialidiocy, on 10/10/2007, -0/+5i believe it would fall under the parody clause...
- J6stik, on 10/10/2007, -0/+510 > 8
- rhinopig, on 10/10/2007, -0/+4Wait... On top of this isn't the original commercial infringing on Lucas Film's rights for using all that star wars stuff? Or is it fair use, or because it's not for profit or something?
- pegisys, on 10/10/2007, -3/+6shouldn't that be possibly != possibility
since we are pointing out others mistakes - honeymustardn, on 10/10/2007, -3/+6Come on, why submit this story again.
- lowerlogic, on 10/10/2007, -0/+3how is back asswards backwards?
It's sdrawkcab ssa. - jebus123, on 10/10/2007, -1/+4Wow, that's cool. You can take public domain stuff and then it becomes your (intellectual) property. Nice.
BTW it's not public domain. - MrUnderbridge, on 10/10/2007, -0/+3Really? Where is the copyright statement where he puts it in the public domain?
Note that posting a video publically does not 'put it into the public domain.' If it did, we'd have infinite rebroadcast rights for anything on TV, wouldn't we? - sacherjj, on 10/10/2007, -0/+3That is a very good idea. Possibly aggregate it like news.google does it. Have a story and a link to the 6 similar stories.
- arcooke, on 10/10/2007, -0/+3Buried for talking about your god damned iPhone.
- shampoovta, on 10/10/2007, -0/+2That was a good laugh for us at home this mourning, thanx. Almost as good as a R-Congressmen in the bathroom.
- superal1394, on 10/10/2007, -1/+3i hate that ***** on facebook.
- Stryder81, on 10/10/2007, -0/+2Maybe it's just me but, Reading that title alone was pissing me off ( and it has nothing to do with the Viacom thing lol )
- sacherjj, on 10/10/2007, -0/+2It most likely would fall into the parody arena, but I'm not sure, having not seen the video.
- ProjectPCs, on 10/10/2007, -5/+7Buried because the title's to confusing to make sense.
- superkendall, on 10/10/2007, -1/+3Lucas actually makes a lot of sound effects available for free use, if he used those it would be fine. There's a large subculture of homemade Star Wars movies they like to help encourage.
- SpyDerMann, on 10/10/2007, -1/+3There's only one way to solve this.
NINJAS!! ATTACK!!! - inactive, on 10/10/2007, -0/+2OK, so he was wrong about public domain, but he is right. When you post something on YouTube, you ARE giving Youtube the authorization to make money off it, which inlcudes them selling the rights to use it to a TV show. It is not in public domain, but for as long as it is still up on Youtube, Google has jkust as much rights to do ANYTHING they want with the video as the guy that created it. And in this case, that included selling the rights to air it on VH-1.
- Figs, on 10/10/2007, -0/+2You know... in languages like C++, possibility is actually less than possibly... I wrote a program to demonstrate but digg won't let me post it here. (damn comment system!!)
- moocow1452, on 10/10/2007, -0/+1but iz lx meoz mx, kitteh sad nowz.
- pegisys, on 10/10/2007, -0/+1string length doesn't help if you are comparing for definition. it would only be true if you are looking for a 10 letter word
- angrykeyboarder, on 10/10/2007, -0/+1The Viacom legal department is clearly filled with asshats.
- angrykeyboarder, on 10/10/2007, -1/+2No but the person who submitted the story would have been alerted to the fact that it had already been posted.
I guess you've never posted a story here eh? - Stonedonkey, on 10/10/2007, -0/+1Yeah... no. They stole it because they're lazy, apathetic, ignorant hacks. If they had not stolen it, Youtube would have produced a bill of sale by now. It was pirated, period, end of story.
- s1mph0ny, on 10/10/2007, -1/+2both are true; possibly has a shorter string length, and it's not the same thing.
- angrykeyboarder, on 10/10/2007, -0/+1Different article. Same subject. This one is much better. Ars puts out great stuff.
- arcooke, on 10/10/2007, -0/+1There's a "bury as duplicate" feature for a reason. If something hasn't been posted in a year and gets reposted, fine.. not that big of a deal. But in the same day? That's a problem. All you have to do is go to page 2 of Digg to see the "old" one.
- thecoolestcow, on 10/10/2007, -1/+2Obscure Hot Fuzz reference?
- r00tus3r, on 10/10/2007, -0/+1Hey pegisys ... welcome to the internets! Get with the lingo!
- inactive, on 10/10/2007, -0/+1ACK! Shrek the Third... Too many rehashes...
- kufu91, on 10/10/2007, -0/+1but they didn't get the rights from youtube
- clubdirthill002, on 10/10/2007, -0/+0Everything Viacom touches turns to dust.
- strictnein, on 10/10/2007, -1/+1Only if it was from the same source. I've posted stuff and the "similar" results that came up were no where near what I was posting about.
- Travelsonic, on 10/10/2007, -1/+1Arse < Ass
-
Show 51 - 69 of 69 discussions
The Digg Toolbar for Firefox lets you Digg, submit content, and keep track of Digg even when you're not on the Digg site. Download the official 
© Digg Inc. 2009
— Content created and posted by Digg users is