This week, Digg went crazy with the release of the encryption key of HD-DVD. At first, Digg attempted to battle it out and delete the illegal submissions. This drove users over the edge. Like the people’s revolutions of history, Digg users through caution to the winds and proceeded to digg a grave for Digg. This is like the nightmares of naysayers the internet… a world in which no laws are enforced.
However, this begs the question of what lies laws the internet should abide by? In reality, the internet exists in an entirely different “world” than ours. I believe that it should be governed as such. Each individual site is like a nation, with laws, citizens, and a government. Unfortunately, problems arise when these two worlds intersect. Information (the product of cyberspace) can be applied in the real world too. To understand this situation, we should look at the physical reality counterpart. Let’s say, in country X, a drug is forbidden. However, in country Y it is freely available. Country X cannot punish you for leaving the country and going to country Y to smoke your drug. However, the minute you reenter the country with the drug, then you’re under arrest. Let’s say the HD-DVD code is our drug and Digg is country Y. What right does country X (in this case, the U.S.) have to arrest someone for “smoking” the code in country Y? However, the minute that the “citizen” takes the “drug” into country X, they can be arrested. This still gives country X no right to declare war upon country Y, simply because their laws are different. However, this is exactly what copyright suits are attempting to do. The only difference in this case is that Digg effectively burned their constitution by allowing citizens to break the law - albeit in mass. What essentially occurred was a revolution. For all intents and purposes, the existing government of Digg has been torn apart, left only with the nuclear bomb of tearing down the site. A new order of anarchy has arisen. Still, neighboring countries (such as the U.S.) have no right to declare war on this new anarchy. Will the old Digg government blow up the bomb? Will country X invade and drop a bomb? Or, will the new anarchy remain intact as a fully social site?

















You wrote:
However, this begs the question of what lies the internet should abide by?
Was that a freudian slip? Made me smile, anyways!
Thanks for pointing that out. Indeed, quite the Freudian slip. I’ve corrected it to laws as well.