The Digg Disaster - What Did We Learn?

May 3, 2007

(This post has been updated below)

I’m going to take an unpopular stance on the Digg fiasco - Digg moderators were right to take down the HD-DVD hex code. Why?

  1. The posting of the code was likely a violation of DMCA 1201. I’m not a lawyer, but does anyone remember the 2600 case? Digg’s hosting of the post containing the hex code could certainly be argued to be trafficking under current DMCA law.
  2. The posting seems to violate the Digg Terms of Service - the same ToS we all agree to when registering at Digg.
  3. Digg’s ToS further states they can remove posts and cancel accounts at any time if they feel it is necessary. Everyone who signs up has to buy into this.

So, what’s the problem? The problem is in how the initial take downs were handled. I know, just stay with me here.

Way back in the dark ages of the Internet (2001) another popular community site was faced with a similar situation. When Slashdot faced a DMCA takedown notice from the Church of Scientology, Cmdr Taco complied as required by law, but also immediately posted a message to the community explaining the situation. As a part of the community, he engaged the members in a discussion about the decision.

In Kevin’s case there was no takedown notice sent (yet) but Digg was rightfully taking down content they obviously felt was in violation of their ToS and likely the law. So, how should the situation have been handled? 2 options:

  1. Leave the hex posting alone and wait for the DMCA notice. In this case there would have likely been few dupes of the post since Digg is generally good at moderating duplicate postings. If the takedown notice came, comply and engage the community in a discussion about the decision.
  2. Delete the initial hex posting as they did. However, when the onslaught commenced, Kevin should have immediately gone to the community. A blog posting, a podcast, a video - anything that could explain the situation and ask for community support.

It seems to me the user revolt at Digg was not so much about the takedowns as it was about the mistrust it created. This situation reinforces the critical nature of transparency and is a lesson to be learned.

Am I suggesting that Digg owes the community a response for every post they remove? Of course not. They probably owe the poster a response, and I’ll bet they do that. But this case was special - not in the takedown, but the massive response it generated. Lets face it, have you ever seen this sort of response from the removal of a post?

Digg users are not off the hook on this by any means either. Being a part of a community involves abiding by the rules, self-policing and engaging in responsible behavior. The DDoS-like response from the community was inappropriate. If you don’t like the DMCA call your congressman.

UPDATE: It seems that Digg did alert community members of the post removals in a blog posting:

This has all come up in the past 24 hours, mostly connected to the HD-DVD hack that has been circulating online, having been posted to Digg as well as numerous other popular news and information websites. We’ve been notified by the owners of this intellectual property that they believe the posting of the encryption key infringes their intellectual property rights. In order to respect these rights and to comply with the law, we have removed postings of the key that have been brought to our attention.

Whether you agree or disagree with the policies of the intellectual property holders and consortiums, in order for Digg to survive, it must abide by the law. Digg’s Terms of Use, and the terms of use of most popular sites, are required by law to include policies against the infringement of intellectual property. This helps protect Digg from claims of infringement and being shut down due to the posting of infringing material by others.

So it would appear that Kevin and Jay did try to engage the community and were attempting to be as transparent as possible about the situation.

With that, my attention turns to the community.  It seems that Digg held up their end of the bargain, and what did they get in return? - an all out user revolt.  Come on diggers!  When you a part of the community you have to exercise some responsibility.  No one wants to live in a neighborhood where the guy next door has a couch and a car on blocks in the front yard.  You actions were unfair to Digg and in the end might ultimately get it shut down.

With a social network as user focused and “user run” as Digg, the users have to do some self-policing.  With great power comes great responsibility…

Similar Posts

Internet, Technology

If you enjoyed this post, please consider leaving a comment or subscribing to the RSS feed and get future articles delivered to your feed reader. You can also sign up to receive updates via email using the form at the top of this page.

Comments

No comments yet.

Leave a comment

(required)

(required)