« The Myth Of Blog Campaign Power? | Main | Capitol Hill's Coming Video Revolution »
May 07, 2007BELTWAY BLOGROLL
Library Of Congress' Blog Caught In Copyright Fight
Reprinted from Friday's edition of Technology Daily
by Aliya Sternstein
Online outrage over a popular Web site's refusal to allow posts containing hacker code has spilled onto a new blog maintained by the Library of Congress.
Digg.com, which lets anyone post and rank Web content, initially decided to remove posts of a software-cracking code that helps bootleggers illegally copy movies. The owners of the hacked software claimed that Digg had violated intellectual property rights by allowing the posts.
But that did not stop online proponents of more open copyright law from trying to distribute the code elsewhere. They chose the library's blog, which is less than two weeks old, as a target.
"We got about six or seven commenters who attempted to post [the code] and I wasn't going to entertain that," said Matt Raymond, the library's communications director and blog author. The blog moderates reader comments. "If people are intentionally trying to violate copyright, they cannot expect that their comments will be posted," he said.
On Wednesday, Raymond issued a warning on the blog. "Not only is it absurd and inappropriate that readers would attempt to use a government blog to break a federal law, but it is doubly so, in that the Librarian of Congress is the ultimate arbiter of so-called 'exemptions' to the section of the Digital Millennium Copyright Act that concerns technological measures that control access to copyrighted works."
He added, "Anyone who supports a particular anti-circumvention exemption [to the DMCA] that is not covered by the current rules should participate in the next triennial rulemaking."
Raymond said he is not interested in identifying the culprits, but the library's general counsel knows of the incident. In an interview on Thursday, he said the episode has taught the library what types of "kinks" might exist in the blog's policy and procedures.
"I guess you need to decide where you are going to draw a line," Raymond said. "Six or seven people who were getting their dander up over something that's happening in the blogosphere -- I don't know that it's worth my time to kind of sleuth" out who was responsible. "It was a minor blip in our comments, and most everyone else has been on topic."
Digg ended up being friendlier territory for the hackers. On a blog maintained by Digg staff, founder and Chief Architect Kevin Rose commented on the controversy Tuesday.
"[T]oday was a difficult day for us," he wrote. "We had to decide whether to remove stories containing a single code based on a cease-and-desist declaration. We had to make a call, and in our desire to avoid a scenario where Digg would be interrupted or shut down, we decided to comply and remove the stories with the code."
"But now, after seeing hundreds of stories and reading thousands of comments, you've made it clear. You'd rather see Digg go down fighting than bow down to a bigger company. We hear you, and effective immediately we won't delete stories or comments containing the code and will deal with whatever the consequences might be."
Posted by Danny | 10:01 AM
