Live data from Hacker News

Ask HN: Why doesn't archive.today get shut down?

news.ycombinator.com

41–43 of 43 posts

Re: Ask HN: Why doesn't archive.today get shut down?

#41
post #33
post #28

Maybe it's difficult to justify a takedown if simultaneously they're responding to requests from search engines with full content for indexing, as part of their business model. Either the full content is available to be indexed, or it isn't - which is it?

It's also a lot harder to actually shut a site down if they care to actually not be shut down, see: KiwiFarms for example. I've never seen a more coordinated attempt to remove a site from the Internet and yet they're not only still there and appear to be quite active, but their infrastructure seems to be stronger than ever as a result. So it's damned if you do, damned if you don't.

I think KF is a bit of a special case since the only reason it’s still floating is because Josh Moon is a pretty competent network engineer and webmaster and has pretty much decided to sacrifice his entire professional career and tens of thousands of his own money in keeping the site alive. Most controversial sites just end up throwing in the towel after they’re kicked off of GoDaddy.

To be clear, I’m not defending Josh’s character or the content on KF, just trying to illuminate something I find fascinating.

Re: Ask HN: Why doesn't archive.today get shut down?

#42

Earlier quoted context omitted.

That comment is in the context of a discussion about data for which a license was granted or not necessary.

And the 9th Circuit Court has determined that publicly accessible data does not require a license and the provider cannot dictate the means in which a user can access it. If a provider wants to do that, they need to place that content behind a walled garden. [1] https://cdn.ca9.uscourts.gov/datastore/opinions/2022/04/18/1...

Excuse me for interrupting, but what has access to do with publication? The problem that someone might have with an archive-site copying and publishing the content on the archive-site's domain isn't about the copying, it's about the publishing.

If all they did was archive but not make these archives publicly available, it would be different case -- if it was a case at all, because nobody would know that they're doing it.

Post reply on HN