You have got to be kidding me with this one
Some people clearly think its a First Amendment issue. There is no intent from us to interfere with peoples right to discuss copy protection. We respect free speech.
They can discuss the pros and cons. We know some people are critical of the technology.
But a line is crossed when we start seeing keys being distributed and tools for circumvention. You step outside of the realm of protected free speech then.
This is a quote from the BBC News article regarding the recent (and frequent) posting of the key to break the encryption of HD-DVDs. It is from Michael Ayers, chair of the AACS (Advanced Access Content System), and apparent dissenter against the tenets of the First Amendment. Now, last time I checked, the First Amendment (specifically, the right to free speech) covered pretty much all language, including that which most people would find completely disgusting and hateful (like the right of the KKK to give speeches spewing their venom and me writing this blog). The prevailing theory in supporting questionable speech is that if you dont like what you hear, you also have the right to not listen.
But when big business is involved, there seem to be other factors that limit free speech. Like money.
Im no legal expert – I majored in history and Russian – but something about the above quoted rationalization for why it is illegal to post the key doesnt sit right with me. How can one limit the right to free speech to simply discussing the pros and cons? Who (and that includes all of the Founding Fathers) said that you cant discuss the actual code in question? Something tells me that the AACS is angry that the key leaked and that the company is probably going to have to shell out a bunch of cash to develop new code. Or they could be pissed that the inevitable happened so quickly. You build a wall and people will find a way to get over it, dig under it, or burst right throught it.
What is the realm of free speech then? Because I am forced to listen to racist, homophobic, and otherwise discomforting slurs that I dont personally agree with just because other people have this right. And you know what, I also have the right to tell them to F-off if I dont like what they are saying. Once we limit the realm of free-speech, we stand to eliminate it entirely.
And props to Digg.com for standing behind their users and fighting the good fight.