O'Reilly writer Steve Mallett has stolen digg's code

I spent some time researching Steve Mallett's latest creations: iTunesLove.com, 180n.com, and linuxfilter.com. It seems he has copy-and-pasted digg's CSS and HTML directly into his own digg clone sites. Then decided to SPAM O'Reilly sites on digg. Don't worry, I have proof.

comments

Comment View Threshold: 
  1. Is the code open source? Is he required to ask permission to use digg's code?
    Mordanthanus posted by Mordanthanus (0) at 01:10 PM 1/09/06 score:
    --
     [block/report]
  2. Well to not even remove the digg refs is just plain lazy and to use CR material is plain wrong. However, there is that old saying: "Good programmers write code, great programmers {steal|borrow|adapt} other people's code". How much of the original digg css was hand crafted or was any of it copied and pasted from someone else's original css? Hey for all I know, every line of digg's css was typed in "fresh", but most ppl start with a template from somewhere (heck, there must be at least 10+ css template digg stories a week). Then again, most templates or example CSS works get expressed permission for ppl to use/modify the css for their own uses so that is clearly different than what Steve has done.
    netmindstorm posted by netmindstorm (0) at 01:16 PM 1/09/06 score:
    0
     [block/report]
  3. if you look on the itunes site it has copyright and trademark notices at the bottom of the site, isn't digg's code copyrighted?
    threemo posted by threemo (0) at 01:16 PM 1/09/06 score:
    0
     [block/report]
  4. I've seen a ton of digg clones, but this is the first to actually copy and paste CSS and use our images. Daniel Burka (digg/mozilla.org designer) put a lot of work into creating the site - it's sad to see someone steal it (and illegal).
    kevinrose posted by kevinrose (58) at 01:19 PM 1/09/06 score:
    2
     [block/report]
  5. Digg's code is copyrighted. All of it. This isn't legal, period. What is worse is to actually use the code to compete with the site. Frankly, I'm still in shock. I half expected this to be false, but I checked and sure enough, confirmed.
    jayadelson posted by jayadelson (0) at 01:20 PM 1/09/06 score:
    2
     [block/report]
  6. This is indeed pretty egregious. There is not only code but images at least for the tabs on LinuxFilter are lifted as well. The CSS, code, and images on Digg were/are all entirely lovingly hand-crafted and original.
    dburka posted by dburka (2) at 01:20 PM 1/09/06 score:
    2
     [block/report]
  7. tysonhy posted by tysonhy (15) at 01:21 PM 1/09/06 score:
    0
     [block/report]
  8. ^^ dburka = Digg's designer
    kevinrose posted by kevinrose (58) at 01:22 PM 1/09/06 score:
    1
     [block/report]
  9. Digg is the best. Only idiots will be fooled by crap like this.
    allarise posted by allarise (0) at 01:25 PM 1/09/06 score:
    --
     [block/report]
  10. i smell lawsuit... ;p
    angelwspr posted by angelwspr (0) at 01:27 PM 1/09/06 score:
    --
     [block/report]
  11. w00t digg's first windfall lawsuit (that I know of)
    morrisonm posted by morrisonm (0) at 01:27 PM 1/09/06 score:
    --
     [block/report]
  12. That is just wrong and pretty fucking ballsy. I'm sure that this is another PriceRitePhoto fiasco in the making.....*grin*
    gregd posted by gregd (42) at 01:27 PM 1/09/06 score:
    --
     [block/report]
  13. "submitted by steveexposed"
    Couldn't this digg user "steveexposed" go to jail now for annoying Steve Mallett by not revealing his true identity.
    iworks posted by iworks (4) at 01:29 PM 1/09/06 score:
    0
     [block/report]
  14. Confirmed
    schutzaus posted by schutzaus (0) at 01:31 PM 1/09/06 score:
    --
     [block/report]
  15. IIRC, html and css can't be copyrighted. Images, sure... but css and html?

    Come on, sure you take the person's hard work but its markup.
    illynova posted by illynova (0) at 01:32 PM 1/09/06 score:
    2
     [block/report]
  16. Welcome to the web 2.0 !!
    Matt2k posted by Matt2k (0) at 01:32 PM 1/09/06 score:
    0
     [block/report]
  17. To be honest, the only one that really resembles it is LinuxFilter.com...and even then the borrowing is very limited.

    Come on...phpBB, IPB, vBulletin, and numerous other BBs had extremely similar looking BBs for the longest. Nobody considers that stealing.

    Much ado about nothing.
    jesusphreak posted by jesusphreak (14) at 01:34 PM 1/09/06 score:
    1
     [block/report]
  18. I honestly could not care less over something as completely pointless as this.
    psyonide posted by psyonide (7) at 01:34 PM 1/09/06 score:
    0
     [block/report]
  19. Corfirned
    harris posted by harris (0) at 01:35 PM 1/09/06 score:
    --
     [block/report]
  20. "Corfirned" WTF?
    gregd posted by gregd (42) at 01:35 PM 1/09/06 score:
    --
     [block/report]
  21. lol its funny digg becomes popular and suddenly tiny sites copy it and claim to be better.
    digg.com >all the clones
    truepatriot posted by truepatriot (0) at 01:36 PM 1/09/06 score:
    --
     [block/report]
  22. Honestly, we're still a bit in shock, we don't know what to make of it. There is no "official Digg point of view" on this yet.
    jayadelson posted by jayadelson (0) at 01:37 PM 1/09/06 score:
    1
     [block/report]
  23. I still prefer digg.com over anything. If you have to steal someones work or idea you really are a piece of shit and it will eventually bite you in the ass.
    jeppy posted by jeppy (0) at 01:37 PM 1/09/06 score:
    --
     [block/report]
  24. Come On! People steal code all the time. This guy was just a little lazy in covering it up. If anything, he should be condemned for his laziness, not for "stealing" Digg's code.
    mizzoucat posted by mizzoucat (0) at 01:37 PM 1/09/06 score:
    --
     [block/report]
  25. How much do you want to bet the same people who are up in arms about this, are the same ones yaking it up in every article about TPB or MPAA? Why is Digg's intellectual property more sacred than other copyrighted materials. Hypocites
    Matt2k posted by Matt2k (0) at 01:38 PM 1/09/06 score:
    1
     [block/report]
  26. From the evidence presented this seems like a legal slam-dunk for the Digg crew. I'll be interested to see how this pans out. It's a pretty pathetic thing to do for a known computing professional.
    bman001 posted by bman001 (0) at 01:39 PM 1/09/06 score:
    --
     [block/report]
  27. I would have to say digg.com should take action against this for sure, however it looks like the digg effect has already taken down the server a few times today :)
    HenryTarling posted by HenryTarling (0) at 01:39 PM 1/09/06 score:
    --
     [block/report]
  28. > Honestly, we're still a bit in shock, we don't know what to make of it. There is no "official Digg point of view" on this yet.

    I'm just trying to figure out what you are in "shock" about. This happens all the time in webdesign. HTML is not illegal to copy and use elsewhere. Neither is CSS. Not to mention, the only thing that is similar is the layout. The colors/graphics/etc, all seem to be different.

    Really, if the creators of Digg make a big deal out of this, its just silly.
    jesusphreak posted by jesusphreak (14) at 01:39 PM 1/09/06 score:
    0
     [block/report]
  29. Yeh, that's rubbish. What a wanker. That's just blatent, lazy plagiarism.
    sgtpinky posted by sgtpinky (0) at 01:39 PM 1/09/06 score:
    --
     [block/report]
  30. I didn't take the time to look at it because this is a new blogger account. Why make such accusations on a new blog that you do not put any information about who you are? Why should we trust an anonymous source who owns the steveisbad blog?

    Why should I trust this new user, steveexposed, on his new blog, steveisbad?
    You must be just another anonymous coward who wants to expose someone instead of telling the people who it really matters to (Kevin Rose and the digg employees).
    funderbolt posted by funderbolt (1) at 01:40 PM 1/09/06 score:
    0
     [block/report]
  31. misterpony posted by misterpony (0) at 01:40 PM 1/09/06 score:
    0
     [block/report]
  32. I wonder if their will be law suites. If Kevin could post a response that would be great.
    i922sparkcir posted by i922sparkcir (0) at 01:40 PM 1/09/06 score:
    --
     [block/report]
  33. Definately stolen.
    tijer posted by tijer (0) at 01:41 PM 1/09/06 score:
    --
     [block/report]
  34. >>> This is not similar...

    This is STEALING PHP CODE‼ >>>

    No, it isn't. Its Mename, which is an open source version of Digg. The only way he could have stolen the code is if he literally got into Digg's server. Its not something that is just accessible, unless the Digg crew is very incompetent.

    >>> I doubt you've ever worked with a high level language for more than 5 hours, you don't want people fucking stealing your damn code for personal gain!! >>>

    Please know what you are talking about first.
    jesusphreak posted by jesusphreak (14) at 01:41 PM 1/09/06 score:
    1
     [block/report]
  35. I actually agree with jesusphreak. This stuff happens ALL THE TIME and using HTML and CSS from other sources is NOT illegal.
    mizzoucat posted by mizzoucat (0) at 01:41 PM 1/09/06 score:
    2
     [block/report]
  36. What a lazy bum. The Digg spamming thing is what REALLY pisses me off.
    Furg posted by Furg (0) at 01:41 PM 1/09/06 score:
    --
     [block/report]
  37. What is your problem...you are through but not through enough...he is using pligg.
    http://pligg.com/about/en

    It is a digg knockoff project.
    caldroun posted by caldroun (0) at 01:41 PM 1/09/06 score:
    1
     [block/report]
  38. it may or may not be illegal but it IS shameless
    mkultra posted by mkultra (0) at 01:43 PM 1/09/06 score:
    --
     [block/report]
  39. > Matt2k just wants attention. He has to play devil's advocate so people will notice him.

    I'm being completely serious. I want to know how this is somehow worse than The Pirate Bay or any of the P2P networks that swap illegal material all the time.

    Where are all the denizens chiming in how this isn't theft?

    Where are all the kids demanding that Digg GPL their code?

    Why is this different
    Matt2k posted by Matt2k (0) at 01:43 PM 1/09/06 score:
    1
     [block/report]
  40. lol @ pligg.com
    truepatriot posted by truepatriot (0) at 01:44 PM 1/09/06 score:
    --
     [block/report]
  41. Confirmed, and wow, that's pretty bad. I mean, not only did he steal the code, but he was stupid enough not to remove the most basic evidence of it. And then advertise it where he stole it. He's just trying to apply the digg formula until he makes something people want.
    nonforma posted by nonforma (0) at 01:44 PM 1/09/06 score:
    --
     [block/report]
  42. shame == yes.. Sue == no.
    caldroun posted by caldroun (0) at 01:44 PM 1/09/06 score:
    --
     [block/report]
  43. geez if you are so worried about it you should have encrypted it so this would not have happened. ignorance is no excuse, what did you think this was not going to happen? welcome to the real world. if it is proprietary, treat it as such. case closed. also good luck in other locales- the world in general has differing standards when it comes to copyright so don't put all your eggs in one basket.
    opennet posted by opennet (0) at 01:45 PM 1/09/06 score:
    0
     [block/report]
  44. The Digg army calls for intervention!
    skell posted by skell (0) at 01:46 PM 1/09/06 score:
    --
     [block/report]
  45. How do we know that he's the originator of the "stolen code"?
    gregd posted by gregd (42) at 01:46 PM 1/09/06 score:
    1
     [block/report]
  46. "No, it isn't. Its Mename, which is an open source version of Digg."

    Exactly. Maybe the code was 'borrowed'. For all I know, it was. But its not this guy's fault, its that of the people who "wrote" meneame.
    burke posted by burke (2) at 01:47 PM 1/09/06 score:
    2
     [block/report]
  47. confirmed
    merckxCannibal posted by merckxCannibal (0) at 01:47 PM 1/09/06 score:
    --
     [block/report]
  48. I think what's sad is that Digg has gone from "reporting news" to being a means to influence the masses with petty stuff such as this (see ebaumsworld from this morning).
    mizzoucat posted by mizzoucat (0) at 01:47 PM 1/09/06 score:
    1
     [block/report]
  49. come on he only used parts of the interface he still had to rewrite the whole PHP backend
    fa_pa posted by fa_pa (0) at 01:47 PM 1/09/06 score:
    --
     [block/report]
  50. "How do we know that he's the originator of the "stolen code"? "

    He's not.
    burke posted by burke (2) at 01:48 PM 1/09/06 score:
    --
     [block/report]
  51. I think its sad when the site's creators get involved in petty stuff like this.
    jesusphreak posted by jesusphreak (14) at 01:48 PM 1/09/06 score:
    1
     [block/report]
  52. If you go to this page:

    http://www.pligg.com/css/meneame1.css

    and search for "digg", you'll find it there. I'm of the opinion that this guy didn't steal the code, but, is using pligg (who stole the code). Don't be so quick to jump on this guy..

    gregd posted by gregd (42) at 01:48 PM 1/09/06 score:
    1
     [block/report]
  53. Yeah jesusphreak is right here. PHP code isn't really steal-able. If you try to go to a .php page it will show you whatever it's supposed to output to the user, and that output is in the source too. The original code is never shown to the end user. View the source on this page right now, do you see any PHP code? It's all HTML when it gets down to this level.

    PHP is like a program on your computer. It displays what it's been told to display and if you just open it in notepad it will give you gibberish, not the source code.
    theantidote posted by theantidote (2) at 01:48 PM 1/09/06 score:
    2
     [block/report]
  54. biters
    SystemError posted by SystemError (0) at 01:48 PM 1/09/06 score:
    --
     [block/report]
  55. Hey guys he even tells you where he got it.
    http://linuxfilter.com/faq-en.php

    It isn't this guy. It is the pligg folks.
    caldroun posted by caldroun (0) at 01:48 PM 1/09/06 score:
    1
     [block/report]
  56. All I see is that he has copied a css file and some images. I don't see what the major deal is. Sure, it's not nice to do it without permission or acknowledgement, but it's a css file, not a block of source code that he obtained by hacking into the servers.

    OregonTrail: I don't see it listed anywhere that he has stolen the actual code. CSS really doesn't qualify as source code. It doesn't make a site, it just controls how it looks. I don't think digg is php either, but I have no basis for that other than observation and knowledge of how the various scripting languages behave.

    This seems like a major over-reaction.
    Waffles posted by Waffles (0) at 01:49 PM 1/09/06 score:
    --
     [block/report]
  57. Please know what you are talking about first.

    I wasn't saying that PHP is a high level 'language', I was just saying that there was obvious hard work put into the back end logic of digg...
    OregonTrail posted by OregonTrail (4) at 01:50 PM 1/09/06 score:
    --
     [block/report]
  58. Its just lazy to not even change some of the different tags in the code to something other than "digg." I guess "© 2004-2006 digg - all rights reserved" means nothing...
    IanPhillips posted by IanPhillips (1) at 01:50 PM 1/09/06 score:
    --
     [block/report]
  59. ^ It's a matter of ethics.
    pillfred posted by pillfred (0) at 01:50 PM 1/09/06 score:
    --
     [block/report]
  60. The best praise is to have someone steal from you. Then you know you're doing something right....
    frozencaldera posted by frozencaldera (0) at 01:51 PM 1/09/06 score:
    --
     [block/report]
  61. I didn't know that CSS and HTML had rights...
    flock31070 posted by flock31070 (0) at 01:52 PM 1/09/06 score:
    1
     [block/report]
  62. I can see this being in the next pod-cast.

    Anyways, digg fans, I've heard some rallying.
    I should hope there's enough maturity here to realize that attacking/flaming would make things worse.

    Leave it to the Digg Crew to handle it.
    The_Monarch posted by The_Monarch (0) at 01:52 PM 1/09/06 score:
    --
     [block/report]
  63. DIdn't Kevin say he would release the code for others to use? Not to say this is right, but now that digg is big, he doesn't want to share.
    wisewaif posted by wisewaif (4) at 01:52 PM 1/09/06 score:
    2
     [block/report]
  64. >>> I wasn't saying that PHP is a high level 'language', I was just saying that there was obvious hard work put into the back end logic of digg... >>>

    Actually, it is a high level language, so you would have been right if you would have stuck with that answer.

    What you were wrong about was trying to say that the guy stole PHP code which is impossible unless the Digg crew didn't know how to run a website.
    jesusphreak posted by jesusphreak (14) at 01:52 PM 1/09/06 score:
    --
     [block/report]
  65. this is too good not to get lots of press and attention DUGG!
    teamparadox posted by teamparadox (1) at 01:53 PM 1/09/06 score:
    --
     [block/report]
  66. Wait a sec! Loophole

    The digg homepage says:
    © 2004-2005 digg!!!!
    OregonTrail posted by OregonTrail (4) at 01:53 PM 1/09/06 score:
    --
     [block/report]
  67. "Actually, it is a high level language, so you would have been right if you would have stuck with that answer."

    dammit... lol
    OregonTrail posted by OregonTrail (4) at 01:54 PM 1/09/06 score:
    --
     [block/report]
  68. Sry I'm just getting into C++ now, hey I'm only a freshman HS
    OregonTrail posted by OregonTrail (4) at 01:54 PM 1/09/06 score:
    --
     [block/report]
  69. Copyright being infringed ?... On the Internet ?... Whatever next !... lol +DIGG

    Digg doesn't deserve to be ripped off - time for some kind of CSS protection...
    ..."ctrl+c" invokes embedded HTML rootkit = permanent DIGG effect.... (That'll screw him)

    Seriously, "original content" protection is nigh on impossible in today's digital world, but there's no excuse for a sloppy copy. Kevin and Daniel got it right the first time because they put the hours in.

    Steve "Muppet" hasn't even tried to hide his crime - he should desist or PAY UP! (IMHO)
    Decisive77 posted by Decisive77 (0) at 01:55 PM 1/09/06 score:
    --
     [block/report]
  70. A lot of digg's majic is in its copyrighted javascript / css, which unlike uncompiled php code, is quite stealable.
    crimson117 posted by crimson117 (0) at 01:55 PM 1/09/06 score:
    --
     [block/report]
  71. Oh nevermind It must have been my browser's old cache
    OregonTrail posted by OregonTrail (4) at 01:56 PM 1/09/06 score:
    --
     [block/report]
  72. I'm with Matt2k on this one. Why is this so blasphemous when people here continually discuss piracy of copyrighted materials? I'm not trying to be a jerk - I'd love to hear a well-thought response.

    This story is certainly unfortunate, but it's also not really that big of a deal.
    buckythecat posted by buckythecat (0) at 01:56 PM 1/09/06 score:
    2
     [block/report]
  73. 595 diggs and 117 comments in 51 min. Is this a record as one of the most dugg stories, considering how long ago it was posted.
    i922sparkcir posted by i922sparkcir (0) at 01:57 PM 1/09/06 score:
    --
     [block/report]
  74. Looks to me like he did nothing more than download the source from: http://meneame.net/archives/meneame-src.tgz (in case you missed the story posted a few weeks ago... http://digg.com/programming/How_to_install_open_Source_Digg_code_(Meneame)_ )
    badman posted by badman (4) at 01:57 PM 1/09/06 score:
    2
     [block/report]
  75. Perhaps we need a DRM for source code? And a RIAA to protect our rights as web developers?

    All you guys love to criticize the RIAA for going after music pirates. But as soon as it's source code that gets stolen, everyone starts going "I hope digg sues him!"
    DigitalAnarkist posted by DigitalAnarkist (0) at 01:59 PM 1/09/06 score:
    2
     [block/report]
  76. Eh, it's just CSS... it's not like it was something he had to go to great lengths to get. The images is another story. If the images are copywritten, then yes, Digg can raise hell, but the CSS shouldn't be an issue since it's just color, layout, and positioning information. IMHO, he deserves a heart-felt slap on the cheek, some public embarrassment, but a kick to the balls is undeserved.
    raptorGT posted by raptorGT (0) at 01:59 PM 1/09/06 score:
    --
     [block/report]
  77. Most hilarious digg clone:

    www.socialporn.com

    (Hey, I didn't find it on my own, it was on a Web 2.0 blog... Tech Crunch I think... I swear!)
    luigi posted by luigi (0) at 01:59 PM 1/09/06 score:
    2
     [block/report]
  78. dugg, and confirmed, what a shame
    blackbelt88 posted by blackbelt88 (1) at 01:59 PM 1/09/06 score:
    --
     [block/report]
  79. You could just care less if he steals the CSS. What we should be digging is if he truly got hold of the source PHP code of Digg or if he just successfully wrote a working one for his site. How bout Shoutwire people? Where do you think they got their code from? Prolly they shared theirs to Steve. Haha!
    gookie posted by gookie (9) at 02:00 PM 1/09/06 score:
    --
     [block/report]
  80. Code Theft Sucks... It's not that he stole the code, but that he's trying to pawn it off as if he actually wrote it.. What a F*cking Looser... I can't wait to hear this on Dig-nation!

    bradp posted by bradp (0) at 02:00 PM 1/09/06 score:
    --
     [block/report]
  81. "Wait a sec! Loophole

    The digg homepage says:
    © 2004-2005 digg!!!!"

    Idiot.Thats the copyright start date.. not when it ends/expires.

    And all of you don't seem to be reading: It wasn't Steve that stole the code! It was the people that made menemane/pligg/whatever. He's just using a copy of their software.. he probably didn't know they stole code from digg.


    Josh
    TheJosher posted by TheJosher (1) at 02:00 PM 1/09/06 score:
    0
     [block/report]
  82. Yes now I realize that PHP must be considered a high level language because my friend wrote a DVD burning automater with it....

    I don't think he did it in assembler..
    OregonTrail posted by OregonTrail (4) at 02:00 PM 1/09/06 score:
    --
     [block/report]
  83. crimson: javascript/css can only do so much. How do you think the site keeps track of the amount of diggs? How do you think it gets automatically put onto the front page? All the main parts of Digg which makes it unique are coded in PHP. Those cannot be stolen (unless there was an insider) and must be made from scratch. Although it's not that hard to create a system like this, it does take a lot of time and effort.
    theantidote posted by theantidote (2) at 02:00 PM 1/09/06 score:
    1
     [block/report]
  84. "uncompiled php code"

    hahaha
    burke posted by burke (2) at 02:01 PM 1/09/06 score:
    --
     [block/report]
  85. Oh yeah I forgot that copywright lasts for like what?

    70 years after death these days....

    Sry I'm just tired and delerious
    OregonTrail posted by OregonTrail (4) at 02:01 PM 1/09/06 score:
    --
     [block/report]
  86. misterpony posted by misterpony (0) at 02:01 PM 1/09/06 score:
    2
     [block/report]
  87. badman posted by badman (4) at 02:02 PM 1/09/06 score:
    1
     [block/report]
  88. I agree with Matt2k, this guy did not steal anything..he just used the freely available code from pligg. I am pretty sure he was not aware that pligg developers stole some css/jscript from digg.com.

    Steve Mallet should sue whoever posted this thread for defamation of character, probably some stupid kid who knows nothing about web development and can only criticize other peoples work. Lets see some of you flamers..what sites have you built lately?

    bazilio posted by bazilio (0) at 02:04 PM 1/09/06 score:
    1
     [block/report]
  89. lol luigi

    i think the reason that ppl have double standards about piracy is because they have a feeling that theyve helped create digg as corny as it sounds.its great to steal from ppl you dont know but when someone steals from you it aint so great.
    yay piracy! although the digg clones are pretty funny sad attempts
    truepatriot posted by truepatriot (0) at 02:04 PM 1/09/06 score:
    --
     [block/report]
  90. I had this happen to me once, lazy webmaster copied my template and a hundred thumbnails i'd spent weeks rendering. He never responded to emails and I certainly don't have the money to take legal action against something like this but I do think it is serious enough to do just that.

    I also download movies and TV shows on a regular basis so maybe I'm a hypocrite, I can copy others but no one can copy mine. Funny thing though, I'd never copy a website or take graphics from it.

    *walks off wondering why that is*
    RiddickRom posted by RiddickRom (0) at 02:04 PM 1/09/06 score:
    --
     [block/report]
  91. Oh and by the way a DDoS would be childish and stupid. Digg should never stoop to that level. If you want Digg to be acknowledged as a respectable place to get tech news then you can never do any childish script kitty stuff like that. We would never recover from a DDoS that came from Digg users.
    theantidote posted by theantidote (2) at 02:04 PM 1/09/06 score:
    1
     [block/report]
  92. Heh he could have put link to digg and avoid all sort of problem or may be letter to digg asking permission about css/html code.

    He runs site related to Open source and Linux and he steals code :o

    I do not expect this kind of behavior from O'Reilly

    echimu posted by echimu (7) at 02:05 PM 1/09/06 score:
    --
     [block/report]
  93. php is an open source programming language. End of dicussion.

    Pligg didn't steal from digg.. they made their own.
    exoendo posted by exoendo (21) at 02:05 PM 1/09/06 score:
    1
     [block/report]
  94. oh the indiggnation! sophie- fetch me a cold cloth i may be feeling a touch of the vapors!
    opennet posted by opennet (0) at 02:06 PM 1/09/06 score:
    --
     [block/report]
  95. 1 hr 2 mins and VERY close to 800 diggs... is this some sort of record?
    modpancake posted by modpancake (4) at 02:06 PM 1/09/06 score:
    --
     [block/report]
  96. I had to digg this from school. Wonder what happens if this hits Diggnation, and what Kevin will say.
    leftfoot posted by leftfoot (0) at 02:07 PM 1/09/06 score:
    --
     [block/report]
  97. For fucks sake. Copying and publicly using copyrighted code is wrong. I will agree.
    http://digg.com/programming/Spanish_Digg_Code_Released
    But a lot of you now have that holier than thou attitude. Stop your torrents, buy your software and quit promoting such activities. Then you might be taken seriously. Until then you are no better than them.
    slipdisc posted by slipdisc (2) at 02:07 PM 1/09/06 score:
    --
     [block/report]
  98. Anyone notice that his username is 'god' on linuxfilter.com? We should hack his Gibson and teach him a lesson.
    krakelohm posted by krakelohm (1) at 02:08 PM 1/09/06 score:
    --
     [block/report]
  99. this guys says flat out that he got the code from pligg:
    http://linuxfilter.com/faq-en.php
    shouldn't we be blaming pligg instead?
    medieval posted by medieval (0) at 02:08 PM 1/09/06 score:
    0
     [block/report]
  100. Pligg is such a sad name. Digg actually stands for something, one of the few site names that sums up what the site is about on a few levels. Pligg? Gimme a break.

    Stil I thought Google was a terrible name but have grown to love it. I still think yhaoo is an awful domain name though. When I see that logo I cringe.
    RiddickRom posted by RiddickRom (0) at 02:09 PM 1/09/06 score:
    --
     [block/report]
  101. This looks like that spanish Digg open sourced code I've seen floating around. It's ugly, and does steal code.

    Please note, you CAN'T steal PHP unless you have FTP / SSH / Etc. access to the webserver. You can however steal the HTML and CSS, among others.
    Sharky posted by Sharky (3) at 02:09 PM 1/09/06 score:
    --
     [block/report]
  102. I love Steve's latest blog entry...

    http://www.oreillynet.com/pub/wlg/8945
    cultleader posted by cultleader (0) at 02:10 PM 1/09/06 score:
    --
     [block/report]
  103. That's Lame - Time to Sue.
    ianubis posted by ianubis (8) at 02:10 PM 1/09/06 score:
    --
     [block/report]
  104. digg got infested with lam3r kids..posting lame threads like this. Digg is doomed..
    bazilio posted by bazilio (0) at 02:10 PM 1/09/06 score:
    1
     [block/report]
  105. >> 1 hr 2 mins and VERY close to 800 diggs... is this some sort of record?

    If it is a record, it just shows how ignorant the general Digg population is. I'm still personally amazed that Kevin and the Digg crew all felt like commenting on this article about how shocked they were. From their reactions it was almost like they had never seen something like this happen before.
    jesusphreak posted by jesusphreak (14) at 02:10 PM 1/09/06 score:
    0
     [block/report]
  106. welcome to the god damn friggin internet. What a sin, having the same CSS file as another site, OH NO! get over yourselves.
    byrons posted by byrons (0) at 02:11 PM 1/09/06 score:
    1
     [block/report]
  107. where's the rope?
    microskomp posted by microskomp (0) at 02:12 PM 1/09/06 score:
    --
     [block/report]
  108. I actually like the 180n site. The top stories section with the details/voting interface is very clean.
    misterpony posted by misterpony (0) at 02:13 PM 1/09/06 score:
    --
     [block/report]
  109. "this guys says flat out that he got the code from pligg:
    http://linuxfilter.com/faq-en.php
    shouldn't we be blaming pligg instead?"

    What, and use our brains? No way! Pillage, rape and burn!
    Waffles posted by Waffles (0) at 02:13 PM 1/09/06 score:
    2
     [block/report]
  110. "php is an open source programming language. End of dicussion."

    Que?

    PHP is open source + this site is coded in PHP -> this site is open source?.

    Anyone wanna remind me what the term for this reasoning is?
    theantidote posted by theantidote (2) at 02:14 PM 1/09/06 score:
    --
     [block/report]
  111. Yea, get over yourselves. I had my html stolen over and over..and I dont care. You can build a replica of anything, take a look at all the ebay rip offs.
    bazilio posted by bazilio (0) at 02:14 PM 1/09/06 score:
    --
     [block/report]
  112. jesusphreak, until something like this happens to you, a project that a lot of work has gone into, its very easy to dismiss it but you have no excuse to be telling Kevin and crew how they should be reacting. From what I've read of their comments, its not like they are typing in caps calling for the head of this guy on a stick.

    RiddickRom posted by RiddickRom (0) at 02:15 PM 1/09/06 score:
    --
     [block/report]
  113. Any updates from the digg crew in this situation?
    leftfoot posted by leftfoot (0) at 02:15 PM 1/09/06 score:
    --
     [block/report]
  114. medieval is right he may have copied it from someone who copied it from digg, doesn't make it any more legal but it doesn't really look all that much like digg. the Internet is built on people copying code hashing it up and making there own stuff.
    phobos posted by phobos (0) at 02:15 PM 1/09/06 score:
    --
     [block/report]
  115. his servers are piss slow
    backstab posted by backstab (13) at 02:15 PM 1/09/06 score:
    --
     [block/report]
  116. As Stated before:
    http://www.pligg.com/css/meneame1.css

    Has the Digg Links..Oh my.
    jpac posted by jpac (0) at 02:15 PM 1/09/06 score:
    --
     [block/report]
  117. Holy crap when I first dugg this about 10 minutes ago it was only at 750 diggs, holy crap.
    leftfoot posted by leftfoot (0) at 02:17 PM 1/09/06 score:
    --
     [block/report]
  118. "Don't worry, I have proof."

    good, i was worried for a second...

    seriously, who cares. css and html are just a fraction of what the site is built out of. this guy is running specialized versions of digg - great idea in my opinion. he's not really competing with digg. the guy who wrote this blog article put way too much effort and time into exposing something so stupid.
    panic posted by panic (0) at 02:17 PM 1/09/06 score:
    2
     [block/report]
  119. Steve is going to feel the "priceritephoto" effect....
    badbilly posted by badbilly (0) at 02:17 PM 1/09/06 score:
    --
     [block/report]
  120. Hmm.. now I see that is is just pligg....
    which is mename...
    which is digg-like/front-end ripoff

    It just still pisses me off that pligg/linuxwhatever would steal the CSS design. Now that is pretty blatant.

    At least mename made it look a little different...

    wait a sec they caused all this f*** that!!
    OregonTrail posted by OregonTrail (4) at 02:18 PM 1/09/06 score:
    --
     [block/report]
  121. Title should read

    O'Reilly writer Steve Mallett is using code that resembles Digg's Code

    Do some effin research before jumping on a bandwagon. Just about every poster is looking for some goddamn cause to join - why not make it something beneficial. The OP did some nice research and all, but how much investigation does anyone here do before they install and configure something from sourceforge?

    http://www.linuxfilter.com/faq-en.php - read this - ctrl+f (or apple+f) for 'pligg'

    Lay off the guy.

    To the creators of digg - what is it like to have all these fanboys hovering around your junk all day?

    phpkerouac posted by phpkerouac (0) at 02:18 PM 1/09/06 score:
    1
     [block/report]
  122. Oh my God BIG DEAL. This happens on the Web every day. Many of us wouldn't have jobs if we didn't know how to repurpose code. I'll give you that puts him in a bad light, given his strong industry affiliation, but lets not chastize the guy so fast.
    erikjernberg posted by erikjernberg (0) at 02:19 PM 1/09/06 score:
    --
     [block/report]
  123. All I can say is wow. Really never expected this from the O'Reilly folks. Even one of their writers...man.
    Tufriast posted by Tufriast (3) at 02:19 PM 1/09/06 score:
    --
     [block/report]
  124. I just hope to God no one ever accidentally creates "nigg"

    *users*
    OregonTrail posted by OregonTrail (4) at 02:20 PM 1/09/06 score:
    --
     [block/report]
  125. No "pligg" for you. ;)
    steveo2112 posted by steveo2112 (0) at 02:20 PM 1/09/06 score:
    --
     [block/report]
  126. 1k diggs in 1h15m.
    modpancake posted by modpancake (4) at 02:21 PM 1/09/06 score:
    --
     [block/report]
  127. and diggs css code is forked from Drupal. who cares!
    v3xt0r posted by v3xt0r (1) at 02:21 PM 1/09/06 score:
    2
     [block/report]
  128. "Good artists copy. Great artists steal" – Picasso
    byrons posted by byrons (0) at 02:22 PM 1/09/06 score:
    --
     [block/report]
  129. 1997 called, it wants its petty internet squabbling back.

    Everyone here needs to chill out.
    sdbrown posted by sdbrown (0) at 02:22 PM 1/09/06 score:
    --
     [block/report]
  130. You could send a cease and desist letter, but that would be against the ethics of the Dark Tipper :) What matters is that those sites suck and this one does not.
    spadin posted by spadin (0) at 02:23 PM 1/09/06 score:
    --
     [block/report]
  131. So, if it is by now confirmed that Steve Mallet has in fact not done anything wrong and actually took the code in question from pligg.com - could someone perhaps put that in the news blurb or on the mainpage, before this here internet mob permanently damages Mr. Mallet's reputation?
    Philippe posted by Philippe (0) at 02:24 PM 1/09/06 score:
    1
     [block/report]
  132. You can drum up support for anything on digg including, but not limited to, slander campaigns!

    The OP is trying to "out" Steve Mallett (who, judging from his O'Reilly posts isn't the brightest bulb), but Steve didn't do anything but poorly implement the Pligg code.

    I'm thankful for the few people that didn't perk up to the latest digg crusade, instantly digg this story, and then post comments bashing this guy for "stealing."
    hotwaterham posted by hotwaterham (0) at 02:25 PM 1/09/06 score:
    --
     [block/report]
  133. "Digg Inc. should get a good lawyer (if they don't have one now of course) and sue the bastard for monetary damages citing theft of their intellectual property."

    OK, so Kevin et all should take all that nice VC $ and go give it to a lawyer so they can be held up in court for the next 2-5yrs over a CSS file that was obviously taken from Mename, not Digg... Maybe they should have taken action when/before Mename appeared... just sayin...

    Now, as a web developer, I'll be the first to say if you do something good and right, get ready for the masses to steal it. I constantly find sites that I like certain features of and I view the source and reverse-engineer it so I can recreate the desired feature / function... this is nothing new to the industry, it just sucks that this douche and Mename ripped off digg sooooo blatantly as to leave tell tale signs in their CSS... However you can rest assured that now both sites have felt the Digg effect and heard the word "lawyer" thrown around they will have the new no-digg CSS file soon, and what could have been a nice Suprise lawsuit has been blown out into the open.

    As far as you all calling for DoS and Hack attacks, STFU and grow up ya lil script kiddies... that will only cause Digg to garner negative PR as a place where "hackers" choose who to screw with this week, and I'd really like to see Digg stay on focus and not turn into another damn G4 bastardization...

    SB
    silentbobsc posted by silentbobsc (1) at 02:29 PM 1/09/06 score:
    --
     [block/report]
  134. What a tool.
    badmammajamma posted by badmammajamma (1) at 02:30 PM 1/09/06 score:
    --
     [block/report]
  135. Philippe wrote "So, if it is by now confirmed that Steve Mallet has in fact not done anything wrong "

    This has not been confirmed at all. If I make a music album and someone comes along and makes a clone of it, using scans of the original but puts that out as a freebie, then someone comes along, makes a copy of that clone and turns that into a commercial venture. There is no legal loophole that allows the commercial venture out of the copyright violation anymore than trying to pass a clone off as open source.

    Both parties are wrong.
    RiddickRom posted by RiddickRom (0) at 02:30 PM 1/09/06 score:
    --
     [block/report]
  136. OMG look!! Another site has stolen from Digg!!!! Call ICANN!!!

    http://meneame.net/

    http://meneame.net/archives/meneame-src.tgz

    Yawn.
    mesostinky posted by mesostinky (0) at 02:31 PM 1/09/06 score:
    --
     [block/report]
  137. Most of the reactions seem to be at the extremes. Either 'he should be sued' or 'what are you complaining about?'

    First, I find it very unlikely that this is a matter for a lawsuit. While it is dishonest I would be surprised if there could be much of a lawsuit over it.

    Second, as a web application developer I have copied code many times. I have taken pieces from css pages and modified them, used ideas that I have seen, and copied from code examples. I don't see anything wrong with using existing material in a REASONABLE way.

    What has been done here (or appears to have been done) is to copy the idea, at least some of the code, images and use the site where it was all stolen from to promote his copy of the site. I think this goes well beyond the borrowing of code that most programmers have done. This is dishonest.

    Even worse, how in the hell could this guy start out with a nice style sheet like digg's and turn it into something that hurts to look at. Yuck!
    aMillionAndNine posted by aMillionAndNine (0) at 02:32 PM 1/09/06 score:
    --
     [block/report]
  138. Yes, the CSS resembles diggs, and the digg references are still there. That said, digg may or may not have a cause for a lawsuit. IANAL, but what I am is neck deep in copyright law right now for a book that I'm getting ready to send off to publishers. Simply put, any written material which can be perceived is automatically copyrighted (this includes HTML and CSS). HOWEVER that is meaningless if that copyright is not registered.

    As for the idea that code theft is all over the net, yes, it happens. Hell, I learned HTML and a couple of it's descendants by copying and modifying other people's code and I'm sure that a lot of other people here can say the same. The problem comes when you start making money off of borrowed/stolen code. It's like the difference between downloading a song to put on your own MP3 player and selling a couple hundred copies of that same downloaded song.

    Ultimately, whether it's worth suing over or not is up to digg.
    rafgar posted by rafgar (0) at 02:32 PM 1/09/06 score:
    --
     [block/report]
  139. phillipe said: "So, if it is by now confirmed that Steve Mallet has in fact not done anything wrong and actually took the code in question from pligg.com"

    silentbobsc said: "and I'd really like to see Digg stay on focus and not turn into another damn G4 bastardization..."

    *bullseye*
    misterpony posted by misterpony (0) at 02:33 PM 1/09/06 score:
    --
     [block/report]
  140. So what?
    inkswamp posted by inkswamp (0) at 02:34 PM 1/09/06 score:
    --
     [block/report]
  141. Digg this to get it on their front page. http://linuxfilter.com/story/103/
    Phobia posted by Phobia (1) at 02:34 PM 1/09/06 score:
    --
     [block/report]
  142. they should save the $$$ to hunt down and kick KoolAidMan in the ding ding....
    silentbobsc posted by silentbobsc (1) at 02:35 PM 1/09/06 score:
    --
     [block/report]
  143. SILENTBOBSC I think you hit this one on the nail, you seem to be the only other one here that isnt trying the american time tested method of getting rich quick i.e. make something cool and the moment someone clones it sue the hell out of him. I also do web dev. and when i see something i like i also "reverse-engineer it " to get the desired effect and sometimes tweak it for my use.

    Point being, these little kids need to get the bigger picture of this. Stop complaining so much, its being fixed and stop acting like this is some personal attack to you. If the "owners" of digg cared that much we would already see them talking about it with lawers and whatnot...
    DarkZen posted by DarkZen (0) at 02:35 PM 1/09/06 score:
    --
     [block/report]
  144. You guys are all a bunch of ass-monkey hypocrites.

    "Ohh the riaa is soo bad"

    "Ohh DRM is sooo bad"

    "I never pay for anything, I download everything from bittorrent servers"

    What a load of shit.

    Well what comes around goes around. How's it feel now THAT YOUR A CONTENT PROVIDER?

    ROTFLMAO!

    Morons.
    TechnoPagan posted by TechnoPagan (0) at 02:36 PM 1/09/06 score:
    0
     [block/report]
  145. If you goto http://www.pligg.com/css/meneame1.css you'll see that it's identical to Steve's "supposed" theft. He used open-source code, not diggs. I wish I had read all the comments and finished my research before I dugg this.
    psiclopz posted by psiclopz (0) at 02:36 PM 1/09/06 score:
    0
     [block/report]
  146. This shall turn into an interesting story...

    +Digg
    RMuffin posted by RMuffin (0) at 02:38 PM 1/09/06 score:
    --
     [block/report]
  147. Digg with more Linux and less Apple zealots! That's the site for me!
    thisnameisfake posted by thisnameisfake (0) at 02:38 PM 1/09/06 score:
    --
     [block/report]
  148. *yawn*
    settsu posted by settsu (0) at 02:39 PM 1/09/06 score:
    --
     [block/report]
  149. Darkzen, just because you are happy to copy and paste others work, or reverse engineer as you call it *rolls eyes* doesn't make it right and your whinging about how no one should complain if that happens is absurd.
    RiddickRom posted by RiddickRom (0) at 02:39 PM 1/09/06 score:
    --
     [block/report]
  150. Not much to be gained from a lawsuit. Certainly this is sloppy coding especially coming from an O'Reilly writer. The embarassment should hopefully be punishment enough.
    joeyjojo posted by joeyjojo (1) at 02:40 PM 1/09/06 score:
    --
     [block/report]
  151. psiclopz you can undigg in your profile
    truepatriot posted by truepatriot (0) at 02:40 PM 1/09/06 score:
    --
     [block/report]
  152. Well...look on the bright side...

    stealing code is the second greatest form of flattery...

    the first is chocolate chip cookies
    kevinj posted by kevinj (3) at 02:43 PM 1/09/06 score:
    --
     [block/report]
  153. "Do I hear DoS attack anyone?!!!"

    Nope. You can go back to touching yourself now.
    hotwaterham posted by hotwaterham (0) at 02:44 PM 1/09/06 score:
    --
     [block/report]
  154. thisnameisfake "Digg with more Linux and less Apple zealots! That's the site for me!"

    And yet, here you are.
    RiddickRom posted by RiddickRom (0) at 02:44 PM 1/09/06 score:
    --
     [block/report]
  155. Wow; really pathetic!
    cornfused posted by cornfused (0) at 02:46 PM 1/09/06 score:
    --
     [block/report]
  156. "Darkzen, just because you are happy to copy and paste others work, or reverse engineer as you call it *rolls eyes* doesn't make it right and your whinging about how no one should complain if that happens is absurd. "

    LOL, just out of curiosity, did you hand code your first app? When you saw an effect and wanted to replicate it, did you hit the books and teach yourself how to? I hope not, it's called a waste of damn time.

    As someone who spends 50+ hrs a week working with code, I can't afford time to re-invent the wheel. Now, I am not so lazy that I will copy-and-paste the code. Reverse-engineering is EXACTLY what it is called, you take all the code you can see and then you tear it down to the bear essentials of what you NEED, then you build your own effect/feature around this "core" code that you've found. If you think this is not common, I really, really, REALLY hope you aren't a dev, because you're costing your employer waaay too much money on wasted productivity.

    To Quote Netmindstorm (and plenty other devs) ""Good programmers write code, great programmers {steal|borrow|adapt} other people's code". "

    SB
    silentbobsc posted by silentbobsc (1) at 02:46 PM 1/09/06 score:
    2
     [block/report]
  157. They are making money off of it so it is wrong. But, they also give credit to digg. But, none to pligg. They might go after him because it looks the same, but digg might go after both of them. But, he did a really bad job of covering it up. This might have been a plan though. Now, we all know who he is. it doesn't have the new update on digg though the "get digging" part so he has been doing something. This is all that i know so far though. But, digg should be ether be getting money from him and/or pligg. But, we have a Linux section here, so why did he make an entire new website? Something has got to be illegal though.
    penguindude15 posted by penguindude15 (2) at 02:49 PM 1/09/06 score:
    --
     [block/report]
  158. somone should submit a story at linuxfilter.com and link it to dudes blog or provide a link to the digg story here.
    masterdwarf posted by masterdwarf (0) at 02:49 PM 1/09/06 score:
    --
     [block/report]
  159. Well we all know what the opening story is going to be on the next diggnation podcast, don't we! He must think the whole world is open source and free for the taking!
    slorocks posted by slorocks (1) at 02:50 PM 1/09/06 score:
    --
     [block/report]
  160. Steve MAllett is apparently not an idiot.

    "One hole I see that will be improved, no doubt, going forward is that often there are users voting for stories liking the headline and not actually knowing enough about niche topics to tell if the story is actually worth voting for. People still like to judge a book by its cover."

    Straight from http://www.oreillynet.com/pub/wlg/8945 and what has happened here.

    I'm suing 90% of you for annoying me anonymously. You'll be getting letters.
    phpkerouac posted by phpkerouac (0) at 02:50 PM 1/09/06 score:
    --
     [block/report]
  161. Ugh, I really wish this site's user base was not all kids. I'm going back to slashdot.
    beejay54 posted by beejay54 (0) at 02:51 PM 1/09/06 score:
    --
     [block/report]
  162. threemo said "You can hear the hum of the digg army assembling for a massive DOS/hack attack..."

    And see the rest of us mature users shaking our heads and being embarassed to be associated with you.

    "This person has done something illegal. To show how wrong they are, let's do something illegal in return."

    Good god it's amazing you people can even dress yourselves.
    Drood posted by Drood (0) at 02:51 PM 1/09/06 score:
    --
     [block/report]
  163. nevermind, I see someone did it:
    http://linuxfilter.com/story/103/
    masterdwarf posted by masterdwarf (0) at 02:51 PM 1/09/06 score:
    --
     [block/report]
  164. Is this why OReilly calls it Web 2.0? His writers are backing up the code so that there's 2 of them?
    drbhoneydew posted by drbhoneydew (0) at 02:52 PM 1/09/06 score:
    --
     [block/report]
  165. So instead of clicking in "about LinuxFilter" before posting you made comments such as "OMFG WTF!!!111!!!! Lets DDoS that suxx0rz".

    OregonTrail said:
    "This is STEALING PHP CODE‼
    I doubt you've ever worked with a high level language for more than 5 hours, you don't want people fucking stealing your damn code for personal gain!!"

    Yeah, the h4x0rz stealed the PHP... We are talking about CSS+images, get a clue.

    opennet said:
    "geez if you are so worried about it you should have encrypted it so this would not have happened. ignorance is no excuse, what did you think this was not going to happen? welcome to the real world. if it is proprietary, treat it as such. case closed."

    Yeah, encrypt the CSS, encrypt the images!! IGNORANCE IS NO EXCUSE. WELCOME TO REAL WORLD.
    Great comment, really really great comment.

    Dhalgren said:
    "You guys should hide a trojan horse in your code that you can activate when someone steals it..."

    Better, encrypt the CSS AND put a trojan horse in. Now thats leet.

    burke said:
    "Exactly. Maybe the code was 'borrowed'. For all I know, it was. But its not this guy's fault, its that of the people who "wrote" meneame."

    Maybe you should look the CSS from Meneame and maybe you should see there no Digg code in it. Maybe you are an idiot.

    burke said:
    "If you feel you must DOS/sue (:rolls eyes:), direct your efforts this way: http://meneame.net/ , not at linuxfilter."

    Yes, you are an idiot.

    switchman401 said:
    "Do I hear DoS attack anyone?!!!

    No, you hear the sound of the echo in your hollow cranium.

    ---------------------------------------

    Now a litle of history:
    1- Meneame releases their code.
    2- Pligg takes it a translates it to engllish.
    3- Pligg changes CSS.
    4- LinuxFilter uses Pligg code.

    Ok now see the CSSs:
    http://digg.com/css/digg2.css
    http://linuxfilter.com/css/meneame1.css
    http://pligg.com/css/meneame1.css
    http://meneame.net/css/es/mnm01.css

    Now so a search with the image of the profiles (tab-back.png)
    http://digg.com --FOUND (obviously)
    http://linuxfilter.com/css/meneame1.css --FOUND
    http://pligg.com/css/meneame1.css --FOUND
    http://meneame.net/css/es/mnm01.css --NOT FOUND

    Pligg copied. Meneame didn't. LinuxFilter uses Pligg's code.

    Culprit: Pligg. Case closed.
    allNicksRTaken posted by allNicksRTaken (0) at 02:53 PM 1/09/06 score:
    2
     [block/report]
  166. Thank you Digg-Fan for the post on linuxfilter if they don't stop we should all just keep posting articles like that and they can't block you...
    penguindude15 posted by penguindude15 (2) at 02:55 PM 1/09/06 score:
    --
     [block/report]
  167. silentbobsc wrote "Now, I am not so lazy that I will copy-and-paste the code."

    but that is exactly what happened here and to try and pass off a copy and paste of both code and graphics as "reverse engineering" is really pathetic.

    I agree with you that reverse engineering is a valid and acceptable way to code.
    RiddickRom posted by RiddickRom (0) at 02:56 PM 1/09/06 score:
    --
     [block/report]
  168. I've been through very similar things - and many even worse - since opening my site in 1998. Fortunately, I think Kevin and gang have the resources to do something about it whereas I was left to just bend over and take it (or - rather - ignore it).

    Hope it works out.
    Seumas posted by Seumas (0) at 02:57 PM 1/09/06 score:
    --
     [block/report]
  169. wow, nasty stuff, he even left the bug report button that dose nothing on his site.
    terrx posted by terrx (0) at 02:57 PM 1/09/06 score:
    --
     [block/report]
  170. >> Why is Digg's intellectual property more sacred than other copyrighted materials. Hypocites - matt2k

    >>The difference is people trading Britney Spears songs aren't re-burning the cds and claiming they wrote and performed the songs.

    Please, thats the lamest bunch of crap rationalization I've heard yet.

    L0zr
    TechnoPagan posted by TechnoPagan (0) at 02:58 PM 1/09/06 score:
    --
     [block/report]
  171. lets get this to the front page of ituneslove.com

    http://www.ituneslove.com/story/83/
    pancho posted by pancho (0) at 02:58 PM 1/09/06 score:
    --
     [block/report]
  172. One more thing: Check out www.pligg.com, that's where the code's from... Try checking it first, those sites look a lot more like that than they look like digg.
    ElectricGrandpa posted by ElectricGrandpa (0) at 02:59 PM 1/09/06 score:
    1
     [block/report]
  173. "but that is exactly what happened here and to try and pass off a copy and paste of both code and graphics as "reverse engineering" is really pathetic."

    Agreed, but I don't think anyone was trying to say that Steve RE'd it, what he did was use the code that was freely available from Meneame.

    SB
    silentbobsc posted by silentbobsc (1) at 03:00 PM 1/09/06 score:
    --
     [block/report]
  174. fanboy00 posted by fanboy00 (1) at 03:01 PM 1/09/06 score:
    --
     [block/report]
  175. I was fooled to digg this. He didn't steel the code, pligg did! I want my +digg back!! :'(
    yonah posted by yonah (0) at 03:01 PM 1/09/06 score:
    --
     [block/report]
  176. confirmed
    digg is still in source code too
    sexualpotatoes posted by sexualpotatoes (1) at 03:03 PM 1/09/06 score:
    --
     [block/report]
  177. Threads like this are what happen when you don't verify information by going to the source. If you are going to *report* on something, rather than queuing up digg stories like usual, then basic reporting tools are necessary. It sounds like the guy unknowingly used copyrighted code. That happens all the time (although I would honestly expect better from an O'Reilly writer). Now you get yourself in a stupid legal debacle because you didn't make a single phone call.
    stonedonkey posted by stonedonkey (0) at 03:03 PM 1/09/06 score:
    --
     [block/report]
  178. Good Lord... I can't believe this thread. This is frickin' ridiculous. And even Rose dugg it. This is the lamest thing I've seen on digg, and that's saying a lot.
    rousehouse posted by rousehouse (24) at 03:04 PM 1/09/06 score:
    --
     [block/report]
  179. I wonder if everyone who is up in arms about this guy illegally copying diggs stuff is just at upset at people illegally copying music?

    Something makes me doubt that.
    gilbes posted by gilbes (0) at 03:05 PM 1/09/06 score:
    --
     [block/report]
  180. haha, this is all good entertainment. The only way to have made it more popular for the fan boys would have been to add a piccy of Steve Jobs naked.
    djhifisi posted by djhifisi (0) at 03:06 PM 1/09/06 score:
    --
     [block/report]
  181. Whatever the reason, the guy should have been stand-up enough to say "you guys have a great website, mind if run the code on my site?" Just seems so underhanded and unoriginal.
    masterdwarf posted by masterdwarf (0) at 03:06 PM 1/09/06 score:
    --
     [block/report]
  182. site down.
    zelig posted by zelig (0) at 03:07 PM 1/09/06 score:
    --
     [block/report]
  183. @yonah & those of you who miss dugg =)
    you can undigg in your profile
    truepatriot posted by truepatriot (0) at 03:07 PM 1/09/06 score:
    --
     [block/report]
  184. silentbobsc wrote "Agreed, but I don't think anyone was trying to say that Steve RE'd it, what he did was use the code that was freely available from Meneame."

    I took it in that sense when I read "make something cool and the moment someone clones it sue the hell out of him. I also do web dev. and when i see something i like i also "reverse-engineer it " to get the desired effect"

    He uses clone and reverse engineer as interchangable words. My opinion still stands on Zens post but I quite agree with your take on it bob.
    RiddickRom posted by RiddickRom (0) at 03:07 PM 1/09/06 score:
    --
     [block/report]
  185. "that old saying: "Good programmers write code, great programmers {steal|borrow|adapt} other people's code"."

    See the source for http://steve.osdir.com/ This guy can't even write clean html.
    jakepaulus posted by jakepaulus (0) at 03:09 PM 1/09/06 score:
    --
     [block/report]
  186. Lets see what the digg crew thinks. We should get Keven to put some of this legal stuff in the next diggnation. There might be more. But, he isn't the first
    penguindude15 posted by penguindude15 (2) at 03:09 PM 1/09/06 score:
    --
     [block/report]
  187. cool truepatriot, thanks for tip!
    yonah posted by yonah (0) at 03:09 PM 1/09/06 score:
    --
     [block/report]
  188. Too many diggs - but it's back.
    botoxx posted by botoxx (0) at 03:09 PM 1/09/06 score:
    --
     [block/report]
  189. There is an undigg function these days people....
    OregonTrail posted by OregonTrail (4) at 03:10 PM 1/09/06 score:
    --
     [block/report]
  190. digg.com is to leve1.com as amazon.com is to overstock.com

    point being, you have a good idea, and has the possibility to make alot of money, people will start to copy you.
    superal1394 posted by superal1394 (1) at 03:10 PM 1/09/06 score:
    --
     [block/report]
  191. What a bunch of babies. Who cares if he copied the CSS? Big whoop! All this talk about suing the guy is ridiculous.
    MrHolla posted by MrHolla (0) at 03:10 PM 1/09/06 score:
    --
     [block/report]
  192. Hey I used Pligg too.... spam me (asses) - http://fuddle-duddle.net

    :-)
    rousehouse posted by rousehouse (24) at 03:11 PM 1/09/06 score:
    --
     [block/report]
  193. Let them know what you think!

    http://linuxfilter.com/story/103/
    hozezero posted by hozezero (0) at 03:12 PM 1/09/06 score:
    --
     [block/report]
  194. @the few who actually have lives:
    Thank you thank you thank you for thinking this is incredibly stupid.

    Kevin Rose, shame on you for digging this. His sites use meneame, not stolen digg code, and ya it resembles digg.com but doesn't http://meneame.net/ also, the software inspired by digg.com? I think its great that there is an open source digg clone, it allows anyone to create their own specialized digg. It could have many applications!!
    Brightside posted by Brightside (1) at 03:13 PM 1/09/06 score:
    2
     [block/report]
  195. @rousehouse, thank you for for that. I'm glad some people have sense. Now the rest of you go back to your senseless Google/Apple/Digg worshipping, while I stick to being a Linux fanboy (we're all of fanboy of something) instead.
    Brightside posted by Brightside (1) at 03:15 PM 1/09/06 score:
    --
     [block/report]
  196. its NOT meneame Its PLIGG.
    Phobia posted by Phobia (1) at 03:16 PM 1/09/06 score:
    --
     [block/report]
  197. Regardless of where he got the code from, if he'd have read it he would have noticed the many references to "digg" in it. Even the dumbest muppet would realise that the code had been stolen.
    werns posted by werns (0) at 03:16 PM 1/09/06 score:
    --
     [block/report]
  198. Is the digg code available as a download? I would love to play with it?
    inkhead posted by inkhead (0) at 03:17 PM 1/09/06 score:
    --
     [block/report]
  199. Somebody stole somebody else's intellectual property!?!?!?!?!?!
    Yeah the Digg community really suppports intellectual property rights :)

    Hypocrites.
    aiiee posted by aiiee (0) at 03:18 PM 1/09/06 score:
    1
     [block/report]
  200. This is shameful!
    zaph0d posted by zaph0d (0) at 03:18 PM 1/09/06 score:
    --
     [block/report]
  201. "Hey I used Pligg too.... spam me (asses) - http://fuddle-duddle.net "

    ROFL how gay.

    all the digg clones are gay. all your styles are belong to us!
    hypnotiq posted by hypnotiq (0) at 03:18 PM 1/09/06 score:
    --
     [block/report]
  202. ^^true
    hozezero posted by hozezero (0) at 03:19 PM 1/09/06 score:
    --
     [block/report]
  203. what an asshole
    brickbat posted by brickbat (0) at 03:20 PM 1/09/06 score:
    --
     [block/report]
  204. 3 points for an excellent use of the word muppet there werns.
    RiddickRom posted by RiddickRom (0) at 03:20 PM 1/09/06 score:
    --
     [block/report]
  205. look at top story on that linux site!
    sexualpotatoes posted by sexualpotatoes (1) at 03:20 PM 1/09/06 score:
    --
     [block/report]
  206. @Phobia: http://pligg.com/about/en
    "Pligg, originally named menéame in Spanish, is a web application that allows you to submit an article that will be reviewed by all and will be promoted, based on popularity, to the main page. When a user submits a news article it will be placed in the "pligged" area until it gains sufficient votes to be promoted to the main page. The original source for Pligg was authored by Ricardo Galli. He was influenced by the extremely popular English technology site digg.com. "
    Brightside posted by Brightside (1) at 03:25 PM 1/09/06 score:
    2
     [block/report]
  207. As much as I think "ripping off" digg is wrong (but let's face it... it's definitely worthy of a rip) I think it's funny that most of the people that are on this bandwagon are probably using pirated Windows, pirated Office, listening to their pirated music, downloading their pirated movies/TV shows... etc etc. You get my drift. Kevin and Alex (hallowed be thy names) admit almost weekly that The Pirate Bay is their Graceland.

    There is just a bit of Karma in the mix here... and possibly it's all for the greater good. Perhaps they should make portions of their site open source and actually practice what they preach?

    So to all y'all on the diggwagon... let he who has never stolen any intellectual property cast the first stone.
    Battleman posted by Battleman (0) at 03:25 PM 1/09/06 score:
    --
     [block/report]
  208. You guys are almost getting as anal as the regular /. crowd (pulls up chair and reaches for popcorn & soda...)..carry on..
    linker3000 posted by linker3000 (0) at 03:26 PM 1/09/06 score:
    2
     [block/report]
  209. Wow. Hilarious.
    dujoducom posted by dujoducom (0) at 03:26 PM 1/09/06 score:
    --
     [block/report]
  210. This also show's the extremes of the "digg effect." I can be a great this, like for example shutting down PriceRitePhoto, but it can be a bad thing when immaturity gets the better of people.
    Brightside posted by Brightside (1) at 03:27 PM 1/09/06 score:
    --
     [block/report]
  211. i've gotta ask this to EVERYBODY. Do you hate everybody on digg? It really seems like if you were in the same room with someone on this comment thread you would actually hit them.

    Even the people with legitimate responses seem to have an elitest, holier-than-thou reply. It's like you really do hate the community you live in.
    danhuard posted by danhuard (45) at 03:28 PM 1/09/06 score:
    1
     [block/report]
  212. *It can...
    Brightside posted by Brightside (1) at 03:28 PM 1/09/06 score:
    --
     [block/report]
  213. I'm not sure why everyone thinks you can't copyrigth HTML & CSS.. the site, in it's entirety, can be copyrighted. The underlying technical details aren't relevant.

    If he lifted the CSS & HTMl directly in order to put up an identical site, this can be construed as copyright infringement.

    3Den posted by 3Den (0) at 03:30 PM 1/09/06 score:
    --
     [block/report]
  214. aiiee wrote "Somebody stole somebody else's intellectual property!?!?!?!?!?!
    Yeah the Digg community really suppports intellectual property rights :) Hypocrites."

    Ok maybe I am. I accept that but are you too not part of the digg community by posting a reply here? In which case you yourself are being hypocritical. Nobodys perfect but the comparison between stealing code and downloading music is not really that fair.

    When I downloaded a lot of music, it was because that is exactly how I wanted my music. The living room stereo had been left to gather dust. I could organise my music in ways I wanted by downloading. Now we have sites like iTunes and I buy my music there. I'm still not clean though. I still download TV shows but I pay for my cable TV. I've paid once. Again when I get the kind of delivery mechanisms I want as a customer, I'll start paying for it directly through the way I want to get it.
    RiddickRom posted by RiddickRom (0) at 03:30 PM 1/09/06 score:
    --
     [block/report]
  215. 10000+ diggs.
    dirtyfratboy posted by dirtyfratboy (17) at 03:30 PM 1/09/06 score:
    --
     [block/report]
  216. "People still like to judge a book by its cover."

    -- Steve Mallett
    bastien posted by bastien (0) at 03:32 PM 1/09/06 score:
    --
     [block/report]
  217. Confirmed. Get 'em boys!
    farkninja posted by farkninja (3) at 03:33 PM 1/09/06 score:
    --
     [block/report]
  218. mirror , mirror, on the wall who IS the fairest of them all?
    posted by allNicksRTaken (0)
    cheers!
    opennet posted by opennet (0) at 03:34 PM 1/09/06 score:
    --
     [block/report]
  219. Some of you people are morons. This digg was posted almost a month ago, the fact that this has been released isn't any kind of state secret: http://digg.com/programming/Spanish_Digg_Code_Released

    Its Mename, which is an OPEN SOURCE system which is based on the same ideas as Digg. Get over it.
    http://pligg.com/about/en
    Pentarix posted by Pentarix (0) at 03:35 PM 1/09/06 score:
    --
     [block/report]
  220. Why are diggers posting crap on Steve Mallett's site? He's not the one that "stole" the code. As I said before and others have repeated, he is using the code from pligg. Plain and simple, it looks like Pligg is the originator of the code heist. Posting stuff on other websites in the name of "diggarmy" and the like just serves to make diggers look like imbeciles anyway.
    gregd posted by gregd (42) at 03:36 PM 1/09/06 score:
    2
     [block/report]
  221. danhuard wrote "Even the people with legitimate responses seem to have an elitest, holier-than-thou reply. It's like you really do hate the community you live in."

    I'm still pretty new here dan but I've noticed the same hostility in many of the comment threads. I think this is more to do with the age of a lot of the diggers. This is just how it is though. I've never found a site ever that I was 100% satisfied with. They all have things you dont like, the best you can hope for is that there is enough in a site to keep you coming back.

    I can scroll, i dont mind going through comments and commenting on the good comments.
    RiddickRom posted by RiddickRom (0) at 03:36 PM 1/09/06 score:
    --
     [block/report]
  222. "view source is your friend"
    search google for it, it's been said many, MANY times before

    shouldn't we REALLY be "suing" (ddosing, spamming, whatever) firefox/opera/internet explorer/safari/w3m/whatever for including the view-source. SHOULDN'T WE SUE THE INTERNET FOR DISPLAYING THE TEXT/CSS MIME-TYPE?!?!
    (/sarcasm)

    I've been a web developer for 6 or 7 years. I have copy and pasted. if not at least view-source'd to see how certain things are done. I'm sorry, but you can't copyright "width: 600px;" in a css file. if you are worried of your HTML/CSS/javascript being stolen, at least throw in some comments in there saying something like "Hey, I spent a lot of time working on this. let everyone know where you got it from", rather than just having a little © symbol at the bottom of the page. or try actually stating somewhere that the publicly accessible sources (html/js/css) are copy written.

    I honestly don't agree that publicly available code can be copy written. and as we already know, PHP code cannot be viewed without access to the server. if that exact source was stolen, then we'd have something interesting here. but we don't
    vh1` posted by vh1` (0) at 03:37 PM 1/09/06 score:
    --
     [block/report]
  223. "i've gotta ask this to EVERYBODY. Do you hate everybody on digg? It really seems like if you were in the same room with someone on this comment thread you would actually hit them."

    Dan, It's really hard not to have a love/hate relationship with digg. On one hand it's a stellar idea and a lot of good news is pumped through it every day...but on the other hand, digg is constantly flooded with outrageously biased stories, spam, and non-news while many legitimate stories are wiped from the front page (especially positive or neutral Microsoft-related stories) because of the selfish actions of many of the users.
    hotwaterham posted by hotwaterham (0) at 03:40 PM 1/09/06 score:
    2
     [block/report]
  224. Yeah, confermed. Its okay that he posts so much I don't think its spamming...
    samfrench posted by samfrench (0) at 03:41 PM 1/09/06 score:
    --
     [block/report]
  225. @hotwaterham: That was one of the most best comments I've seen on anything for awhile. That there totally describes digg.com
    Brightside posted by Brightside (1) at 03:42 PM 1/09/06 score:
    --
     [block/report]
  226. I love this stuff on digg...I wish there was a seperate section for "iJustice" or something....that way the super protective tech geeks would not complain about this shit......(or a section for News, or what have you)
    Chongo posted by Chongo (0) at 03:42 PM 1/09/06 score:
    --
     [block/report]
  227. Those trying to compare Bit Torrent piracy to what this guy did, don't really get it.

    I see d/l piracy, although clearly illegal (no one can debate that it isn't), is justified in that it allows you to get a product (commercial free television or trials of software/movies) that you can't get otherwise. If you use photoshop once a year for 30 minutes, there isn't a rental model or anything that allows you to use it on the cheap. If you forgot to record last week's Lost, or don't want to sit through commercials, or would prefer to watch it on an airplane, a fairly priced solution is not yet available (iTunes d/l's look like crap compared to xvid, and the pricing is way off).

    Taking and using someone else's code without permission is more in line with eggregious piracy... say, where a company uses photoshop daily and fails to pay for it.

    And in this case, I don't even think it's about the money... it's about asking for permission and not giving credit where credit is due. And to use it on a tech site is especially dumb... if it were a site about poodles, I don't think anyone would have noticed.
    scotticus posted by scotticus (0) at 03:45 PM 1/09/06 score:
    --
     [block/report]
  228. monketman posted by monketman (0) at 03:46 PM 1/09/06 score:
    --
     [block/report]
  229. iJustice? There is a reason that vigilanteism is illegal. This mob rules mentality is a fucking joke.
    gregd posted by gregd (42) at 03:46 PM 1/09/06 score:
    --
     [block/report]
  230. Can digg please get a threaded view for its comments? The page load for this is getting crazy.
    Brightside posted by Brightside (1) at 03:46 PM 1/09/06 score:
    --
     [block/report]
  231. I may be wrong, but didn't Rose open source digg's backend on sourceforge?

    http://sourceforge.net/projects/odiggframework
    noclip posted by noclip (12) at 03:47 PM 1/09/06 score:
    --
     [block/report]
  232. maybe we legal action is required. but maybe a little something something from the more hack syavy is in order.
    steve_s posted by steve_s (0) at 03:51 PM 1/09/06 score:
    --
     [block/report]
  233. "maybe we legal action is required. but maybe a little something something from the more hack syavy is in order."

    How is it that you were able to scroll all the way down to the "submit a comment" form, but you didn't bother to read any of the posts before it that cleared up the misconception that Steve Mallett went through the trouble to steal CSS code from digg.com?
    hotwaterham posted by hotwaterham (0) at 03:53 PM 1/09/06 score:
    --
     [block/report]
  234. vh1 wrote "shouldn't we REALLY be "suing" (ddosing, spamming, whatever) firefox/opera/internet explorer/safari/w3m/whatever for including the view-source. SHOULDN'T WE SUE THE INTERNET FOR DISPLAYING THE TEXT/CSS MIME-TYPE?!?!
    (/sarcasm)"

    No, because you are not stealing the code. You are viewing it. Stealing it comes in when you take it from notepad and publish it as your own work. As a web developer of so many years, you should really have known that.
    RiddickRom posted by RiddickRom (0) at 03:54 PM 1/09/06 score:
    --
     [block/report]
  235. haha he's going to be in trouble!
    wow this article has over 2000 diggs and over 300 comments
    probably the biggest one of 2006 yet!

    http://www.skattertech.com
    sahaskatta posted by sahaskatta (106) at 03:55 PM 1/09/06 score:
    --
     [block/report]
  236. @RiddickRom and SB

    Yes, i learned how to code the right way, by hard coding it. Its been years now and i sill prefer to hard code everything and yes i do adapt code that i have found but i do also leave comments on where i got the idea not only to give credit but to also remind me that site had cool/good ideas, and that it might be nice to drop in again sometime to see if there is anything else interesting i might have overlooked.

    Yes, i also hate to re-invent the wheel, after all if it works right the first time chances are that it will work right the third, fourth, fith.... etc, you get the idea.

    Im not saying copy&paste like MANY websites are these days (i think ive seen the same basic layout on almost every website ive seen in the last 2 years, all with just new and pretty colors or effects..blah blah copy and cloned bs..etc..etc. Its the web, if it makes you mad i suggest you use one of those interpreters that encrypt your HTML/PHP/XHTML/ETC ETC ETC....)

    I would also appreciate it if i was not blindly shot at by someone who believes that i charge a large amount for my work, i do web dev. in my spare time now and for the work that i do take on i charge more than considerably less than what 90% of the devs out there. (think about the price of a nice dinner for 3 at a decent restaurant, and no im not talking 5-start, hell im barely even talking 2-star MAYBE, and none of that over priced trendy crap.)

    And as a last note, when referring to reverse engineering something i do not usually mean just finding the pieces you want in the clear text and cutting out what i don't want, sometimes you cant get to the source entirely (if you don't believe me then you must not do much dev) so sometimes you have to figure out how they did something based on what you can see and what code you do have. So please don't try to belittle something that may be less trivial than you think. In the end, if its so easy then why havnt we seen hundreds of more digg or ebay clones or anything of the sort right?
    Thanks, and this is my last post in this story, have a good night arguing who should sue who and enjoy the flame wars...

    Oh yes, and in the end i think if your going to copy&paste something you should at least leave a simple comment that it was either an adaption from another website or just put the url, don't take the credit for what you didn't do.

    -DZ
    (sorry for the annoying long post...)
    DarkZen posted by DarkZen (0) at 03:56 PM 1/09/06 score:
    --
     [block/report]
  237. It's hilarious how people's free styling brave-new-world ideals about the abolition of Intelectual property laws extend *right* up until the point someone copies some style sheet entries. Woah! Isn't that convenient!


    Matt2k posted by Matt2k (0) at 04:01 PM 1/09/06 score:
    --
     [block/report]
  238. >> Who cares?

    To all the people that have this attitude:

    When was the last time you spent months or years of your time, putting your heart and soul into something, only to have someone else come along and casually copy it without even giving you credit?

    What? You never produced anything substantial of your own?

    Thought not.
    IceUck posted by IceUck (0) at 04:02 PM 1/09/06 score:
    --
     [block/report]
  239. How is this wrong?
    lol... children.
    ramsinks.com posted by ramsinks.com (1) at 04:03 PM 1/09/06 score:
    --
     [block/report]
  240. This is just wrong and shows extreme laziness.!
    fadedwranglers posted by fadedwranglers (0) at 04:03 PM 1/09/06 score:
    --
     [block/report]
  241. Confirmed = unbelievable
    Bluenoise posted by Bluenoise (1) at 04:05 PM 1/09/06 score:
    --
     [block/report]
  242. No digg for this.

    As you know software patents are evil. And the thing that makes digg work is not the user design. Hello, there is some scripting in the backend! Who cares if someone copies your design.. you make the HTML and CSS publicly available for the entire world to download.

    Get over it.
    emostar posted by emostar (0) at 04:05 PM 1/09/06 score:
    --
     [block/report]
  243. I hope they fire him. This was the same a-hole who said Digg is burying Slashdot. He seems single minded and lazy. Screw him.
    tarun posted by tarun (21) at 04:06 PM 1/09/06 score:
    --
     [block/report]
  244. Confirmed as well...
    phyre posted by phyre (0) at 04:07 PM 1/09/06 score:
    --
     [block/report]
  245. Darkzen wrote "a lot"

    Basically Darkzen, you wrote what you wrote and there is no edit feature. You can back it up with what you really meant by it but all I can tell you is I responded to what I saw. Perhaps then it was just an unfortunate turn of phrase that is now clarified.

    Gosh, look at that. No flame war, something resolved and everyone goes to bed happy.

    Could be hope for us internet posters yet!
    RiddickRom posted by RiddickRom (0) at 04:08 PM 1/09/06 score:
    --
     [block/report]
  246. how did my story get removed? http://linuxfilter.com/story/105/
    fanboy00 posted by fanboy00 (1) at 04:08 PM 1/09/06 score:
    --
     [block/report]
  247. Confirmed.

    And even if the site code cannot be copyrighted and this matter wouldn't be illegal, it shows at least how little education he has in not even telling the Digg head honchos about him using their code.

    Digg+.
    DominicanZero posted by DominicanZero (0) at 04:09 PM 1/09/06 score:
    --
     [block/report]
  248. Source code stolen to make a linux site, am I the only one that sees the humour in that? Just typical of the OSS community.
    kinderstod posted by kinderstod (0) at 04:09 PM 1/09/06 score:
    --
     [block/report]
  249. Confirmed... that people don't read the posts above before posting their opinion... ;-)
    rousehouse posted by rousehouse (24) at 04:13 PM 1/09/06 score:
    --
     [block/report]
  250. it was wrong for him to say he wrote the code when all he really did was rewrite bits and peaces. but i think diggs code should be open source anyways
    nifixx posted by nifixx (0) at 04:14 PM 1/09/06 score:
    --
     [block/report]
  251. I completely agree with the whole stealing is wrong issue, but all the stupid 12 year old's that keep saying "digg is the best" just anoy the fuck outta me.
    First of all, no need to state the obvious, if we didnt know digg was good we wouldnt be here.
    Secondly, it seems like theyre just the ignorant fanboys that will clam something is the best regardless of the actually quality of the content.

    I am assuming that if not all, a lot of these people are young kids. It distresses me that the next generationg is so willing to conform rather than make educated and rational decisions.
    synthesist posted by synthesist (1) at 04:15 PM 1/09/06 score:
    --
     [block/report]
  252. i just finished the steve malletts page on wikipedia.org http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Steve_mallett
    steve_s posted by steve_s (0) at 04:17 PM 1/09/06 score:
    --
     [block/report]
  253. wow so sad to see that
    jables posted by jables (1) at 04:18 PM 1/09/06 score:
    --
     [block/report]
  254. ummm... he didn't steal the code
    he's using freely available source code from a digg clone called 'meneame'.
    see: http://meneame.net/ and http://www.digg.com/programming/Spanish_Digg_Code_Released
    you can "steal" a copy right here: http://meneame.net/archives/meneame-src.tgz
    ericpp posted by ericpp (2) at 04:18 PM 1/09/06 score:
    --
     [block/report]
  255. good work nancy drew..
    flatline posted by flatline (1) at 04:26 PM 1/09/06 score:
    --
     [block/report]
  256. I clicked on the vote botton on one of his articels he had on his 180 site then I did a anti-spyserch and found that I hadspyware that said rehg@Orilley somthing it probally wasn't the only site that he use's to spyware on your compture fond alot more that said Rehg@ at the begging of the name
    scott1 posted by scott1 (0) at 04:26 PM 1/09/06 score:
    --
     [block/report]
  257. Still though, someone stole code, big deal. Digg needs to just get a page to post things related to this site. This has no place on the front page, yet everyone accepts it.

    Seems like people will digg anything with the words "digg", "microsoft sucks", "linux is 1337", "kevin rose".
    synthesist posted by synthesist (1) at 04:27 PM 1/09/06 score:
    --
     [block/report]
  258. So he's using his digg clones to put spyware on our comptuers
    scott1 posted by scott1 (0) at 04:27 PM 1/09/06 score:
    --
     [block/report]
  259. I don't get this thing. If it is open source and he used it, what's the point? As long a pligg.com has not violated digg.com's IP - which I doubt.

    highman posted by highman (0) at 04:28 PM 1/09/06 score:
    --
     [block/report]
  260. you guys are morons. check this out:
    http://digg.com/music/iTunesLove_-_Digg_for_iTunes
    stevenem posted by stevenem (0) at 04:29 PM 1/09/06 score:
    --
     [block/report]
  261. i cant read all the responses but.. as far as comparing it to the RIAA..

    it's a different thing.. this is the same if someone downloaded some copyrighted music then posted it on his website and said he was the singer...
    falseintellect posted by falseintellect (0) at 04:34 PM 1/09/06 score:
    --
     [block/report]
  262. The submitter needs to be banned. If I were Steve I would get some good lawyers and go after "steveexposed" for irreparable damage to his good name.
    noclip posted by noclip (12) at 04:37 PM 1/09/06 score:
    0
     [block/report]
  263. http://digg.com/technology/Digg_users_fooled_by_title

    Really, what happened to the days when people stopped worrying about copy-cats and worried about their own damned products. Digg's in no danger of loseing its traffic, somone using the plig engine with a digg like interface is in all likly hood trying to narrow down the field aka from all news to just linux news or just gamer news. Let people innovate off this great idea.

    Other then everyones 2 cent morals (as in double) lets keep in mind that innovation has lead to some of humanities greatest technological leaps. Regardless of weather digg gets the credit or not (which they should) I'd rather see better products on the market.

    Just in case there was any question to my beliefs on IP, I believe that the only thing IP laws should protect are small companies/people from big companies.
    eonblue posted by eonblue (0) at 04:37 PM 1/09/06 score:
    1
     [block/report]
  264. that and this:
    "BadMan said...

    Maybe you didn't see the post a few weeks back where a spanish site released the source-code for digg?
    http://www.invokemedia.com/spanish-digg-meneame-installation-instructions.html
    stevenem posted by stevenem (0) at 04:37 PM 1/09/06 score:
    --
     [block/report]
  265. ummm...wasn't digg supposed to have an API ready for the masses by now?
    if they did this wouldn't be an issue.
    bash posted by bash (3) at 04:39 PM 1/09/06 score:
    --
     [block/report]
  266. Wow people are really starting to get to the bottom of this, props to AllNicks... for his long post comparing all the main carachters in the comments. Besides people sleal other peoples designs all the time. Look at the sites that steal the apple.com look. We don't bash them do we?

    If anyone really wanted to they could just save digg.com or any other site on there Hard-Drive and edit it in frontpage or dreamweaver and change names amd links. It's not hard even to look at code and understand it. It's alot easyer to read html, php, css then to write it. I can read and write html and i'm only 15.

    Kevin and Daniel I understand your anger and frustration, but you should be flatered that nename created the spanish version. Digg isint in spanish so what are other languages supposed to do? Write there own versions, thats what.

    Anyway don't bash this on diggnation and get Alex and Kevin Rose to read all the coments before making a prejugment.

    Thanks
    steal_apps01 posted by steal_apps01 (1) at 04:39 PM 1/09/06 score:
    --
     [block/report]
  267. "Why are diggers posting crap on Steve Mallett's site? He's not the one that "stole" the code. As I said before and others have repeated, he is using the code from pligg. Plain and simple, it looks like Pligg is the originator of the code heist. Posting stuff on other websites in the name of "diggarmy" and the like just serves to make diggers look like imbeciles anyway."

    Amen!

    It's because most of them who do ARE imbeciles, anyone who has posted a comment to his website regarding this post is:

    a) A Moron
    b) embarrassing us all
    c) Doesn't do their homework before jumping into their "1337" Suits
    *** d) All Of the Above ***

    Seriously, stop with the digg army crap, it's lame and if anything is threatening this site, it's you script-kiddies that launch DoS attacks against sites without knowing WTF you're talking about in the first place. Really... you're no better than that KoolAid a$$hole who spammed the comments... if you're THAT l33t, get some job other than flipping burgers and playing on your 360s and make a useful app instead of launching a DoS attack that any newb and a google search could pull off.

    SB

    PS - Yes, the Photo scam slam was righteous, but we don't need to slam every biased story before we know the full scope, and for #*&#'s SAKE don't post the guys personal info, jeesus that' abhorrent...

    silentbobsc posted by silentbobsc (1) at 04:39 PM 1/09/06 score:
    2
     [block/report]
  268. The irony is that his sites are probably receiving a lot more hits right now :/

    OK, he downloaded some kind of Digg clone... His site still sux. Case closed :P
    zerosum posted by zerosum (0) at 04:40 PM 1/09/06 score:
    --
     [block/report]
  269. I don't give a rats ass if he stole it or not, and I don't see why the hell this is interesting for anyone other than Digg or Steve.
    bosse posted by bosse (0) at 04:46 PM 1/09/06 score:
    --
     [block/report]
  270. Dan Huard-

    No I don't hate this community, I love discussions and I really wish the comment feature were a little more friendly to long, drawn-out discussions, however I *do* hate all these little "DIGG is teh r0xx0rz!" "Digg pwns Slashdot!" kids around here that go out and slam a site or person that doesn't deserve it. Technically, he didn't "steal" anything directly from Digg, this code is a byproduct of Meneame. If anyone is culpable it'd be the guys that developed that package, however considering the geographic seperation, I doubt there is any legal recourse, sadly.

    However, I do recall mention of Digg being open-source several times though, so noone can be particularly held at fault, except for the lack of commenting and proper... well... "props"... I'm glad that Kevin's little side project blew up so much, but his army of wanna-bes is going to eventually bring back a very negative effect on Digg, karma's a bitch...

    Other than that, glad to see you guys participating, I'd say all the normal shit but I'm sure you've heard it 10,000,000 times already, so way to go and &#*% the man!

    SB
    silentbobsc posted by silentbobsc (1) at 04:50 PM 1/09/06 score:
    1
     [block/report]
  271. confirmed
    dabellah posted by dabellah (0) at 04:52 PM 1/09/06 score:
    --
     [block/report]
  272. DDoS? heh
    fogurt posted by fogurt (0) at 04:55 PM 1/09/06 score:
    --
     [block/report]
  273. Steve here. This has certainly been an interesting read.

    Here's the story: Meneame releases their Affero GPL'd code, which I'm pretty darn sure isn't stolen. Then the Pligg project does a translation from Spanish to english, I use Pligg's source code which is also Affero GPL'd.

    I'm looking into what code, if any, came down the line to me stolen, but I'm inclined to say the stylesheet was used as a template and changed suitably.
    comforteagle posted by comforteagle (1) at 04:56 PM 1/09/06 score:
    1
     [block/report]
  274. @R2D2

    Why the hell would you post his information here? What did you hope to accomplish by that? Post your fucking personal information...
    gregd posted by gregd (42) at 04:58 PM 1/09/06 score:
    --
     [block/report]
  275. UGH.. this is completely childish.
    Again, the guy didn't steal anything. He is using code from pligg.com which may have taken digg's css/html design.
    Look at AllNicksRTaken above and do some freakin' research before accusing someone of stealing.
    ericpp posted by ericpp (2) at 05:04 PM 1/09/06 score:
    --
     [block/report]
  276. Steve, if I were you I you I would email Blogger requesting that they take down the blog and possibly persue a libel case against the poster.

    Wikipedia's article about Digg now includes the details of this incident, which will hopefully help eventually clear it up: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Digg
    noclip posted by noclip (12) at 05:05 PM 1/09/06 score:
    1
     [block/report]
  277. mark R2D2's comment as spam, come on man.
    pwallroth posted by pwallroth (2) at 05:07 PM 1/09/06 score:
    --
     [block/report]
  278. Digg for great justice
    icetigaurus posted by icetigaurus (0) at 05:07 PM 1/09/06 score:
    --
     [block/report]
  279. ... and why are people digging a story from a guy whose digg name is steveexposed and blog name is steveisbad? The guy clearly has it out for this steve person for whatever reason.
    ericpp posted by ericpp (2) at 05:15 PM 1/09/06 score:
    --
     [block/report]
  280. --Digg for poorly aimed and mislead justice
    silentbobsc posted by silentbobsc (1) at 05:16 PM 1/09/06 score:
    --
     [block/report]
  281. Good job noclip, nice to see some people on here with some common sense, rather then the blind, digging masses.
    Pentarix posted by Pentarix (0) at 05:19 PM 1/09/06 score:
    --
     [block/report]
  282. There are lots of great Pligg sites out there, just like Steve's. Congrats to Steve for using open source software to implement a great site. And to the haters, you should be embarrassed and ashamed.

    For more great Pligg sites, check out:
    http://www.pligg.com/forum/forumdisplay.php?f=12
    rousehouse posted by rousehouse (24) at 05:25 PM 1/09/06 score:
    --
     [block/report]
  283. Let's not forget that digg gets alot of it's UI code from open source sites, like "A list apart", so don't be so quick to judge.
    pocketkaos posted by pocketkaos (0) at 05:34 PM 1/09/06 score:
    --
     [block/report]
  284. Well Digg.com should be proud, even if they are hiding their inspiration well, they have created a site/system that others want to steal, modify, use. Its the ultimate in respect when you get copycatted. There are lamers who will steal straight from you, at least put a little creativitity in it. All these copiers can't even get the header right. Man CSS hacks but really bad ones at that. This rip, and many since xmas break I might add, has only solidified thsi design as digg.com style.
    drawkbox posted by drawkbox (0) at 05:34 PM 1/09/06 score:
    --
     [block/report]
  285. Wholly jeezus, I just went and looked at his site and our a$$hat brigade is in full force... I'm starting to become ashamed to be part of this community...

    For the love of the gods, Kevin, Dan, Leo, John, ANYONE please address these children on the next podcast, they only seem to listen to you...

    and I quote "#8 Wait till the TWit army hears about this"

    Am I the only one embarrassed by quotes like this and : "#5 Diggnation!@@"

    We can't be a professional community if we have a bunch of hormone-overloaded youths attacking sites who are for the most part, innocent...

    SB
    silentbobsc posted by silentbobsc (1) at 05:40 PM 1/09/06 score:
    --
     [block/report]
  286. Here's a good article on whether CSS can/should be copyrighted.
    http://mezzoblue.com/archives/2003/12/18/css_copyrigh/
    cpher posted by cpher (0) at 05:44 PM 1/09/06 score:
    --
     [block/report]
  287. crush, obliterate, destroy all digg copyright stealers!!
    mechakevinrose posted by mechakevinrose (0) at 05:45 PM 1/09/06 score:
    --
     [block/report]
  288. fun stuff, we've got the holier-than-thou diggers spouting comments about how they detest other diggers for being angry with this steve fellow in full force. Honestly get off your soup box and leave this topic alone. Nobody cares that you're ashamed or upset with the users that are angry. Do something else with your time and let the users vent.
    Spineshanked posted by Spineshanked (0) at 05:54 PM 1/09/06 score:
    --
     [block/report]
  289. @Spineshanked

    Nah, I won't. This is crap, and I'm calling people on it. Deal with it.
    rousehouse posted by rousehouse (24) at 05:58 PM 1/09/06 score:
    --
     [block/report]
  290. *sigh*

    I'm seriosly contemplating leaving digg. (not that any of you care ;) )

    All this talk of DDoS attacks... for using an OPENLY AVAILIBLE PREMADE SCRIPT is just stupid. You need to grow up.

    Josh
    TheJosher posted by TheJosher (1) at 05:59 PM 1/09/06 score:
    --
     [block/report]
  291. http://www.torrentspy.com uses the same kind of interface for it's news articles...
    jagnum1fan posted by jagnum1fan (2) at 06:34 PM 1/09/06 score:
    --
     [block/report]
  292. pwnd...
    dmoffitt posted by dmoffitt (0) at 06:56 PM 1/09/06 score:
    --
     [block/report]
  293. wonky thanks for the screen-full of beer
    morrisonm posted by morrisonm (0) at 07:04 PM 1/09/06 score:
    --
     [block/report]
  294. @Spineshanked

    Who are people "angry" at? This guy is using code he freely acquired from pligg. Have you gotten that yet or did you not read the comments? And have you gotten it yet that spamming another site with "diggarmy" crap makes us all look bad or are you one of them?

    This shit reminds of when I was a kid and I'd tell my mom, "I only did it cause everyone else was doing it."
    gregd posted by gregd (42) at 07:09 PM 1/09/06 score:
    --
     [block/report]
  295. Timeout.

    1.) Everyone should stop spamming the offending sites. The information available seems to indicate that Mr. Mallet did not intentionally rip off Digg. It SEEMS that the code in question came from the framework he used for his sites. Instead of letting your testosterone run rampant let the people at Digg deal with this in a reasonable and WELL THOUGHT OUT manner. Regarding the comments that he should have known that the css was taken from Digg - I have installed Movable Type applications for friends' sites and I never checked to see if there css came from somewhere else. I am not trying to absolve Mr. Mallet from responsibility but please don't jump to overly quick assumptions. The immediacy of Digg is one its best features but stopping to actually think things through is a good thing.

    2.) Speaking of the people at Digg, Kevin and Daniel made brief comments at the beginning of the thread. They have not been going overboard on this so I think the comments about how horrible it is that they responded to the story are a bit much.

    3.) All of these analogies comparing this to people's attitudes towards file sharing (from both sides) are merely that, analogies. They sound great but making an analogy does not prove a point. Different things are... different.

    4.) There is a lot of talk about suing, what is copyrighted, what is illegal, etc. These are complex issues that are not realistically dealt with in comments.

    5.) I think that some of the most insightful comments in this list have been from *silentbobsc* and *RiddickRom* who, while disagreeing on some of the points have expressed well thought out and intelligent opinions. Kudos to you both.

    6.) The title of the posting and several comments try to implicate O'Reilly in this situation. Just because someone works for a company does not mean the employer approves or condones whatever they are doing.

    7.) Sorry for rambling on but I have had a few cocktails and I am watching a hockey game while I type. Since this is a comment forum I can only assume that someone will find fault with some of my spelling or grammar. I guess that is to be expected.
    amillionandnine posted by amillionandnine (0) at 07:48 PM 1/09/06 score:
    --
     [block/report]
  296. Thanks... a-million(andnine) for the calm and clarity, and even after a few cocktails. The comments were getting a little out of hand.
    m
    maxmiles posted by maxmiles (0) at 08:01 PM 1/09/06 score:
    --
     [block/report]
  297. One more point to my rambling comment that has been mentioned before but bears repeating. Unless there was some sort of theft of code that we do not know about the only things that were taken were styles, images, and ideas. PHP (or whatever Digg is using) is server side code. That means that the server processes the code and sends the HTML created by the code to the browser. The main code behind Digg was almost certainly NOT stolen. We are talking about the code that formats the content for display not the code that drives the site. That does not mean that is right to take it but it is an important distinction.

    Hearkening back to my comment earlier today; whoever was responsible for hijacking the styles turned it into something completely heinous.
    amillionandnine posted by amillionandnine (0) at 08:02 PM 1/09/06 score:
    --
     [block/report]
  298. Wow, that's a lot of diggs haha.

    IP should definitely be protected at all costs so if the code really is stolen then this is a major concern that such another big website's content creator would "borrow" the code from another high exposure site. Having content stolen is a problem that all us bloggers and webmasters deal with every day.

    http://www.hagrin.com
    hagrin posted by hagrin (0) at 09:12 PM 1/09/06 score:
    --
     [block/report]
  299. If you think this is "terrible, shocking theft" and you also download copyrited mp3s and are okay with that, then you have a lot of gall, because that is the height of hypocrisy.

    Some points:

    - These files are publicly available to anyone. All one has to do is "view source". There's nothing you can do to keep people from looking at your css file.

    - How in the hell is this stealing? Did the files disappear off of digg's servers? Did someone hack into the server and type 'rm *.css'. Well, that is the definition of theft, isn't it? It means that they have it and you don't. The truth is that he has made a copy, and he hasn't deprived you of a thing.
    blackthorne posted by blackthorne (0) at 09:42 PM 1/09/06 score:
    --
     [block/report]
  300. "*sigh*

    I'm seriosly contemplating leaving digg. (not that any of you care ;) )

    All this talk of DDoS attacks... for using an OPENLY AVAILIBLE PREMADE SCRIPT is just stupid. You need to grow up.

    Josh"

    LOL! Some kids don't have a sense of humor? Of COURSE I'd never ACTUALLY DDoS somebody! Oh, and do you need help on the way out? Want me to grab the door? =D (Yes, that's yet ANOTHER joke! Haha!)
    fogurt posted by fogurt (0) at 10:00 PM 1/09/06 score:
    --
     [block/report]
  301. Even though this is already old news, Matt2 has a VERY good point. After all, according to so many of you, you can't steal something that isn't physical. So, by stealing a COPY of a movie ot MP3, it is not stealing (Read this far too many times on digg.) Stealing is only when you deprive someone else of their possession. (Again, read that idiotic logic too many times on digg.) Does Digg not still have the code? Yup. So it is not stealing.
    jkfan87 posted by jkfan87 (1) at 10:04 PM 1/09/06 score:
    --
     [block/report]
  302. comforteagle posted by comforteagle (1) at 04:55 AM 1/10/06 score:
    --
     [block/report]
  303. The people calling downloading or cases like this stealing is really disconnected from reality.

    Stealing and copyright infingement is two different things.
    Legally as well as morally judging by the standards of a vast majority of people in most countries.
    Like most people I would never steal a physical CD from a shop, but I do download sometimes.

    But it's interesting discussion I think what the difference is between copying someones CSS and downloading an mp3.
    They might appear similar but infact their not at all.

    The big differerence is that downloading music or films is something you do because you like to check out someones creative work.
    It's not ripping anyone off and it might be the case that you later decide to buy the CD or go to a concert if you like what you hear. It's like the radioplay of today since people is bored with the multitude of stations programmed by the same few labels..

    Using someone elses graphis or code on the other hand is more like if you would work producing a TV advertisment and take an artists music without paying royalties or making an agreement with them.
    In that kind of cases it comes close to stealing for me morally, but legally it's still a copyright infringement and not theft.

    Thereby not said I agree that Steve is a thief...I don't know much about this case but it seems like a storm in a tea cup.
    caban posted by caban (0) at 05:11 AM 1/10/06 score:
    --
     [block/report]
  304. My statement after a lot of reading, writing, and a restless night: http://steve.tawkr.com/2006/01/10/my-response/
    comforteagle posted by comforteagle (1) at 06:07 AM 1/10/06 score:
    --
     [block/report]
  305. Just an fyi to those that don't know how: Anyone that wants to un-digg this story, it is easy: Just go to your profile, and when you your list of diggs, click the undigg button.
    dongiaconia posted by dongiaconia (1) at 11:42 AM 1/10/06 score:
    --
     [block/report]
  306. ^forgot the word "see" *when you see your list of diggs
    dongiaconia posted by dongiaconia (1) at 11:43 AM 1/10/06 score:
    --
     [block/report]
  307. Undigg, people!

    /never dugg it
    Flashman posted by Flashman (0) at 12:51 PM 1/10/06 score:
    --
     [block/report]
  308. NO, YOU ARE THE ONES WHO ARE THE BALL LICKERS!
    jmccorm posted by jmccorm (6) at 08:57 AM 1/11/06 score:
    --
     [block/report]
  309. TCDToxic posted by TCDToxic (4) at 10:17 PM 1/12/06 score:
    --
     [block/report]
  310. timewarrior posted by timewarrior (0) at 12:50 AM 1/13/06 score:
    --
     [block/report]

Login to comment. Don't have an account? Create one here.