What is Digg?168 Comments
- Alex2, on 10/25/2007, -3/+97Because artists are starving.
Have you seen Iggy Pop? You can see his ribs!
Seen Kid Rock? The guy is a stick!
Fats Domino? NO LONGER FAT!
You downloaders are killing artists! - refugeechris, on 10/25/2007, -6/+63Damn police state holding hands with corporate entities again.
- remisser, on 10/25/2007, -6/+51Let's hope that the way they executed this helps exonerate the people of oink and that some semblance of a site can go back up.
- jtmeyer, on 10/25/2007, -2/+46for a while they had the page source as "SMILEY FACE"
how snarky.
i hope OiNK takes legal action against them for hacking their site. - gldfshnpcklejar, on 10/25/2007, -5/+46I want to know this too, it seems a bit crazy to allow a company to take control of someone else's site. Guess that's Britain for you. Police state. I've never used oink but I find this "We're above the law because we think you're breaking the law"-attitude bull *****.
- inactive, on 10/29/2007, -7/+37Moo.
- inactive, on 10/25/2007, -9/+33False charges Ftw.
- MrSkoTSir, on 10/24/2007, -0/+22They may have a case for shutting the site down, but letting the IFPI mess with the domain isn't kosher. What did they hope to accomplish anyway with the stupid message they put up on the OiNK domain.
As a musician I don't approve of stealing music, but maybe there needs to be a little bit of restructuring in the way music is sold. For example, the new Radiohead cd is being freely distributed, but they're still gonna sell the cd in stores http://web.nme.com/news/radiohead/32001 for fan's who think its worth paying for. maybe the era of record companies making millions off artists is just... over/ending. cause i really don't think shutting one site down will have any noteworthy effect on people stealing/sharing music. - Frostman3D, on 10/25/2007, -0/+20I think it is pretty questionable that the law enforcement would allow a private organization access to a seized domain.
- missingnoh4x, on 10/25/2007, -0/+20You hadn't heard? The IFPI, BPI, RIAA, and MPAA now collectively compose the fourth branch of the U.S. government, with no checks on their power at all.
- yergi, on 10/24/2007, -0/+18How dare you insinuate that Britney is an 'artist' in the slight.
- Mike89, on 10/25/2007, -3/+20Sorry to comment jack, but I'm surprised no-ones taking the liberty to DDoS the 'new' oink.cd in retaliation. I mean, doesn't digg usually love this kind've thing?
It wouldn't be hard either, the IFPI logo on that page is 151 kilobytes, just get a bunch of diggers running Gigalodader (http://www.gigaloader.com/)
Image: http://oink.cd/IFPILOGO.JPG
Set multiplier to 50.. enter a message if you wish (How about International Federation of Pirate Interests? :P) - thevelvetsun, on 10/25/2007, -3/+19This is intellectual terrorism. They put up that message on Oink to scare people. In reality, with over 250,000 members, it's unlikely they will go after any users, and if they do, it will be a very small number, just to set an example. They assume everyone is guilty, and spread propaganda in the media to try to make people agree with them. But downloading will never go away. A huuuuuge portion of internet users do it. Closing down one site will hurt the music industry's reputation far more than it will hurt any user.
- HalFTW, on 10/26/2007, -3/+19Copyright infringement is not the same as stealing.
- graemee, on 10/24/2007, -1/+16So that's why Britney's a bad mother.
Damn Downloaders. - cmdrNacho, on 10/24/2007, -2/+16You are a moron..did you even RTFA
1. "How many times do they let the father of a murder victim work on the investigation of the Murder?" why are these groups involved , and probably the bigger question is (im asuming these groups are similar to the RIAA) why are corporations using government funded police to enforce what they've investigated. It would be like one gang using the police to take out another gang, based on what gang 1 was investigating.
2. the record labels hijacking the site and with no real investigation.
copyright violation is a very small issue in the overall big picture of this article - nnnr, on 10/25/2007, -0/+12TPB should launch an OinK clone at the domain they stole www.ifpi.com
- r3bol, on 10/25/2007, -1/+13This trend is getting very worrying. So if you have a lot of money and want to change/break laws people have put in place - you just do it with the help of the police (which makes it legal:| ). This should be petitioned so that the top key players are brought to the peoples justice and imprisoned.
- tomis, on 10/24/2007, -1/+13My first guess would be it's because the government has more/bigger guns than you do. Not that stealing entertaining media is worth fighting to the death over, but you're not likely to get very much resistance from an unarmed citizen surrounded by cops. Because if they do, it's likely they'll end up dead.
Government and religion, the original terrorist organizations. - vat0r, on 10/26/2007, -0/+11PA42 is using twisted logic. If I "steal" a copy of an album the creator/owner of the album does not lose the album. They still have copies and retain the rights. A domain is a whole different ball game since as we all know domain names are unique and cannot be copied. So if someone "takes" a domain from you it qualifies more as stealing in my opinion because you no longer have access to your property.
- captainloogie, on 10/24/2007, -1/+11i quite like this blog post from the artist DJ/Rupture. a very clear and straightforward appraisal of the problems of this blank demonisation:
http://www.negrophonic.com/2007/defending-the-pig- ... - zeitgueist, on 10/25/2007, -2/+111. If no images were stored, just links, then depending on local laws, it is likely that the website should not be taken offline.
2. No. A website can tell me how to kill a man, but they're not responsible if I do it. - philz, on 10/24/2007, -1/+9What about Fat Boy Slim? Is he fat? slim? both?
- dbr_onix, on 10/24/2007, -2/+9'Nintendo participated in a raid just the other day, shutting down a factory that made mod chips and ***** to faciliate piracy on the Wii.'
Modchips have plenty of other uses aside from piracy. I have an Xbox, for which I never played an illegal game on, which is modified (albeit soft-moded, but the concept is identical)
'big-assed corporations who, contrary to popular belief on digg, are far from dead, dying or powerless.'
I don't think anyone is saying big corporations are dying (if they were, they wouldn't be 'big', would they?), it's the 'old' methods in which they handle media distribution that is 'dying'
All this money they are spending suing random people for 'stealing music and killing the music industry' could (and should) be put into something slightly more important. Yes, they are breaking the law, but I'm sure you've probably broken about 20 different laws today, if you read into all the archaic texts, odd by-laws and such that are still in place today. Should everyone turn themselves into the police because they didn't wear a hat in public on sundays, or because their ducks aren't wearing long-pants? No, because it's of negligible.
We'll see. In a few years, when the 'oh no casette tapes mean people won't go and see live music anymore!' repeat-of-history blows over, I imagine there will be lots of companies wishing they spent less time suing everyone and more time improving the experiences of legitimate customers (Mini-rant: Improving the experience of buying games/music/TV shows/films will do infinitely more to prevent piracy than any annoying and inconvenient, or damaging DRM system will.) - kag9000, on 10/24/2007, -0/+7The reason why the 'victim' is allowed to be a part of the execution and investigation is because the victim is the Corporations. The corporations own our governments. Our politicians are bought and paid for, thats why they allow the use of our police officers, Thats why corporations have the ability to ignore the law when it suits them. Its called collusion and corruption, and it is not just happening to file-sharers.
- HalFTW, on 10/24/2007, -1/+7It looks like the guy still has control over the domain: http://www.dnsstuff.com/tools/whois.ch?ip=oink.cd& ... All he needs to do is point the domain at a new server. Perhaps accidentally send a recent site backup to TPB. :o
- XxN3RDC0R3xX, on 10/24/2007, -3/+9Chill out dude.. way to be a dick
- TiKoZ, on 10/24/2007, -1/+7because they can!
- maffiou, on 10/24/2007, -1/+6Is oink paying for the BW or Ifpi ?
I'd be interrested to know... - brainbox, on 10/24/2007, -1/+6You're conflating "telling someone HOW to kill a man" with "telling someone TO kill a man".
My suggestion to the former would be "straight through that soft spot on the lower-back of the head, with a really long pointy spike". My suggestion for the latter would be "don't, he's not worth the mess on your shoes". - DTCNT, on 10/24/2007, -9/+14That is, because you are living in a police state, where the rule of law is with those who have the guns, not the people. Welcome to 1984.
- MagicXB, on 10/25/2007, -0/+5Because 'moo' just doesn't sound right.
- actorboy, on 10/24/2007, -1/+6There are obviously a lot of people who think like you. Why not start your own lobby group? Everybody seems eager to pony up a few for Jammie Thomas or a magical Pirate Island. Why not pool your resources resources instead of throwing it away on already-lost cases or pipe dreams?
- actorboy, on 10/24/2007, -1/+5Double or nothing comment system.
- jtmeyer, on 10/24/2007, -0/+4at some point, idiots like you are going to have to realize the the LAW is WRONG.
- vat0r, on 10/24/2007, -1/+5Zzone is cool enough to not be a "digger" yet here he is posting comments on digg....mmmmkkkay
- darienphoenix, on 10/24/2007, -4/+81. No, because no one likes pedophiles, whereas everyone likes music.
2. It's not a crime if it happens on the internet from the comfort of a padded swivel chair. - cgomez, on 10/24/2007, -1/+5The police in Britain don't have guns.
- MisteR2, on 10/24/2007, -3/+7Ok then...Tell us what to do when the "law" is bought and paid for by monied interests and flies in the face of the original idea of copyright(at least in the states, with respect to advancement of the arts and human knowledge).
- ktetch, on 10/24/2007, -0/+4The BPI is the british version of the RIAA, and both are members of the IFPI
- Alstroph, on 10/24/2007, -1/+5OiNK was an amazing community. I'm glad I at least had a chance to take part in it... although I was far from done. Thanks for helping me discover lesser known artists, OiNK.
- brickbat, on 10/24/2007, -1/+5your comparison is *****. What most of the people appear to be complaining about is that ifpi and bpi are NOT the police force. What gives them the right to basically hijack a site and threaten its users even before there has been a court case - or for that matter even after the court case. The only people that should have a right to post something on that website are the owners or the police. So for your comparison to make any sense there would have to be 2 rival pedophile gangs and...like I said, *****.
- JoelBakan01, on 10/24/2007, -1/+4This is what happens when the elite run the world instead of the people; a rich minority rules. Democracy is dead.
- adam2z, on 10/24/2007, -0/+3it is a question of what the majority want to do. eventually. right now the law is at odds with that.
- PA42, on 10/24/2007, -0/+3Copyright laws in the US come from the constitution, not from money. Look at the original notion of copyright in the constitution (which you incorrectly paraphrase) states that congress has the power to:
"To promote the Progress of Science and useful Arts, by securing for limited Times to Authors and Inventors the exclusive Right to their respective Writings and Discoveries;" (article 1, section 8). It is very clear that an author (in this case a song writer who sold his write to a producer) should have "exclusive rights," meaning they control how it is sold or distributed. - adam2z, on 10/24/2007, -0/+3i have bad grammar so you can start scorn me
- PA42, on 10/24/2007, -1/+4really bad analogy.
they didn't come to a downloaders domain, they went to the source. This is like shutting down a black market and holding everything in evidence (which would be done). They also would shut down the store and may put up a sign informing the community.
You fail - cmdrNacho, on 10/25/2007, -1/+41. there are varying levels of crime.. whats moral and immoral is judged by society. its not as black and white as you make it out to be -- refer to ancient greece, and tell me if stmt 1 is that bad
2. police will do what they want. Look at the war on drugs, is it working ? take 1 down 100 more will take its place. - Waiting2awake, on 10/24/2007, -2/+5Because that thought lasts for about 1 minute before you realize regardless of the numbers of the little people - they still only have little money to donate. The RIAA would drwarf anything the masses can put together, and
even if there was a ground swell of support for this - the powers that be would only claim that the lobby is only an internet thing, or the system is being gamed, or some of the other silliness we see with ground-up campaigns...
The best way to defend an unjust law - is just ignore it. Don't obey it, act as if it, and those that would enforce it, simply have no authority over you. - postalblowfish7, on 10/24/2007, -0/+3i smell a legal precedent about to be set...
-
Show 51 - 100 of 167 discussions
Check out the new & improved 
© Digg Inc. 2009
— Content created and posted by Digg users is 