Digg revolt, part 2

Here is a quote from a quote from an article I found on BoingBoing.

It is this: all information is not equal in value. Some of it was created with considerable investment in time and money that needs to be paid back.

I think this view misses the point: It's the users (read that as: the market) who will decide what has value, and what has none. Just because you think what you have is valuable, and you want to charge for it (or prosecute for it) doesn't mean it really has value.

Yes, those "self-obsessed post-adolescents" as Digg users are described (contrast and compare my "just a bunch of computer geeks" statement from before), are the minority now. Sure, tell us we're immature and we don't matter (and by we--I include myself even though I'm past the age of 50), but sooner or later you will be brought to a rude awakening. Trust me. I don't buy Sony, and never will, again. I have friends of means who feel the same way. In time we will represent a majority. What, then, o mavens of industry?

Now, let's discuss the "only a utopian fantasist would argue that all information should be free" statement. No. Not all information should be free. But the point (that is missed, yet again) is exactly who should determine what's to be free, and what isn't? The point really isn't that the AACS code was posted on the Internet, it's that Digg users exerted their ownership of Digg, and decided it was important that their desires not be ignored. Sure, the owners of the AACS code can go after the Digg users. Sue away. Have at it. They "stole" from you and should be punished.

But as for Digg, they are not responsible for the content. Period. The real owners have decided that.

PS. Hasn't anyone thought of the real reasons why Digg users are so pissed off about the AACS code? Maybe it has to do with the reason it exists, at all. Yes, it's hard to respect those who (by virtue of attempting to restrict what you can do with things you buy, like movies) don't respect you. If you seriously want to treat me like a criminal, then I will piss in your Cheerios every chance I get. I hear a tinkling sound, right now.

PPS. I call "bullshit" on the following statement, as well: "Those morons who want to destroy private property (and that includes trade secrets) put at risk the very future of innovation itself." Nah. Not a problem. Trade secrets (AKA patents) today only serve to inhibit innovation. Real, true innovation needs no protection. It's just harder, that's all.