On 5/9/07, Todd Allen toddmallen@gmail.com wrote:
The fact that the number itself is a big part of the issue here (as evidenced by this conversation, after all?) So, why should we -not- print it? It's evident AACS doesn't intend to cause legal trouble, they'd make themselves a laughingstock.
http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/technology/6623331.stm
We have no frigging idea which way the MPAA is going to jump. While personaly I might find a situation where they end up owning digg.com extreamly funny I don't think that would make them a laughing stock.