Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

Internet Archive’s National Emergency Library Harms Authors

authorsguild.org

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

11–20 of 49 posts

Re: Internet Archive’s National Emergency Library Harms Authors

#11

Post by smichel17 »

incompatible wrote: post #7
incompatible wrote: post #6

Copyright just introduces artificial and undesirable scarcity, and I doubt that it really supports many authors. This piece says that mean writing incomes are only $20,300 a year, and I wouldn't be surprised if a large proportion goes to a few of the most popular authors and many get little or nothing. Scrap copyright and find other ways to support creators. I'd suggest funding from government for a decent number of…

This isn't particularly radical, arts and science already receive quite a bit of government funding in many countries. I suggest doing more of it and expanding it to new areas, and adding the CC0 requirement. I doubt that it would cost much compared to the amounts governments are throwing around these days to support people, and at least some creative output would come from it.

CC-BY and CC-BY-SA are also both fine licenses for this type of work.

Re: Internet Archive’s National Emergency Library Harms Authors

#12

Post by voiper1 »

arpa wrote: post #5

Well, thank you authors guild, for pointing me to the great library. 'Tis a shame you are people who would see the great library of alexandria burn in the sake of profit.

aka Streisand effect

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Streisand_effect - The Streisand effect is a social phenomenon that occurs when an attempt to hide, remove, or censor information has the unintended consequence of further publicizing that information, often via the Internet.

Re: Internet Archive’s National Emergency Library Harms Authors

#13

Post by moron4hire »

clarry wrote: post #4
zhdc1 wrote: post #2

Distasteful, and not something I agree with at all, but I appreciate that someone is making an alternative argument (even if that's what they're paid to do).

Except that there's no argument, just the same old copying = theft meme and a false dichotomy between buying and copying, plus a bunch of whining.

They also conveniently avoid accurately describing the scope of what IA is offering, plus misrepresent how IA acquired the books. http://blog.archive.org/2020/03/24/announcing-a-national-eme...

"This library brings together all the books from Phillips Academy Andover and Marygrove College, and much of Trent University’s collections, along with over a million other books donated from other libraries to readers worldwide that are locked out of their libraries.

...

We understand that we’re not going to be able to meet everyone’s needs; our collection, at 1.4 million modern books, is a fraction of the size of a large metropolitan library system or a great academic library. The books that we’ve digitized have been acquired with a focus on materials published during the 20th century, the vast majority of which do not have a commercially available ebook. This means that while readers and students are able to access latest best sellers and popular titles through services like OverDrive and Hoopla, they don’t have access to the books that only exist in paper, sitting inaccessible on their library shelves. That’s where our collection fits in—we offer digital access to books, many of which are otherwise unavailable to the public while our schools and libraries are closed. In addition to the National Emergency Library, the Internet Archive also offers free public access to 2.5 million fully downloadable public domain books, which do not require waitlists to view."

Re: Internet Archive’s National Emergency Library Harms Authors

#14

Post by henearkr »

I discover many books I love on the wild web, and then decide to get the paper version when I'm hooked by the style / want to read it while doing digital detox / want to be able to leaf through efficiently if it is a technical book, etc.

If anything, wild ebooks have increased a lot my paper books purchases, and even if not everybody is like that, even for the percent that is alike it would mean that more free ebooks means more purchases.

Re: Internet Archive’s National Emergency Library Harms Authors

#16

Post by ipython »

Oh my god this attitude absolutely infuriates me. I just assisted my kids’ piano teacher in organizing an online virtual piano festival. The technical piece was easy- set up a google form where students could submit their information and a video of their performance.

The hard part? In an in person festival, the student hands their sheet music to the judge sitting in the room before performing, so the judge can track and note any deviation between the music and the performance.

We wanted a similar experience online, so our local festival organizers reached out to the wonderful music publishers licensing lawyers. Their response was wholly unhelpful. They wanted to make SO certain that in this pandemic their precious sheet music for elementary school age kids was NOT stolen. They wanted measures such as pasting a “used with permission” watermark on any picture of the music, purchasing a separate copy for the judges, and ensuring secure erase of any files after the festival!

It was absolutely insane. This sort of inflexible attitude in a time of crisis makes me irrationally angry. If we had any way to avoid purchasing music from these .... people ... I would do it in a heartbeat.

Re: Internet Archive’s National Emergency Library Harms Authors

#17

Post by ddevault »

How much of your annual $100-$500 membership dues are you waiving in the light of the difficulties you explain your membership as facing in these dire times?

Screw copyright and screw this rent-seeking noise. Self-publishing is rapidly becoming the norm, and who knew - authors are seeing way higher returns on it. Copying e-books incurs no material cost and therefore charging for it is not justifiable.

Re: Internet Archive’s National Emergency Library Harms Authors

#18

Post by dash2 »

ddevault wrote: post #17

How much of your annual $100-$500 membership dues are you waiving in the light of the difficulties you explain your membership as facing in these dire times? Screw copyright and screw this rent-seeking noise. Self-publishing is rapidly becoming the norm, and who knew - authors are seeing way higher returns on it. Copying e-books incurs no material cost and therefore charging for it is not justifiable.

-- Self-publishing is rapidly becoming the norm, and who knew - authors are seeing way higher returns on it.

Have you got evidence for either of these claims? Are you an author?

Re: Internet Archive’s National Emergency Library Harms Authors

#19

Post by dash2 »

incompatible wrote: post #7
incompatible wrote: post #6

Copyright just introduces artificial and undesirable scarcity, and I doubt that it really supports many authors. This piece says that mean writing incomes are only $20,300 a year, and I wouldn't be surprised if a large proportion goes to a few of the most popular authors and many get little or nothing. Scrap copyright and find other ways to support creators. I'd suggest funding from government for a decent number of…

This isn't particularly radical, arts and science already receive quite a bit of government funding in many countries. I suggest doing more of it and expanding it to new areas, and adding the CC0 requirement. I doubt that it would cost much compared to the amounts governments are throwing around these days to support people, and at least some creative output would come from it.

The idea that artists should be first forbidden from selling the work they create, and then supported by the state, is totalitarian. Analogy: would you make all code compulsorily open-source? (I know some people will answer yes: in my view, they're nuts.)
Post reply on HN