Because of the "online mob," both youtube and digg are facing copyright issues that could potentially put them out of business. Destroying over $1bn in assets is kind of a big deal.
You have to do what your users want, simple as that. If what your users really want is openness and honesty that's what you give them. Digg's users want to be able decrypt dvds (even if in the abstract for most of them). They've had many accusations of lack of transparency in the past that went nowhere.
And this explains my point: Digg has never been honest and that eventually paid off.
Seriously, is this what social media is about? Complete chaos?
I don't think it of respectful users, I think it of Digg users, which have never been shown to be intelligent or respectful of either the web site they use or anyone else for that matter.
What we know is that with 2.0, control over online content has been handed to the users. What we don't know is how the users will decide to wield this power, and the effect it will have on the likes of digg/youtube/etc.