Internet Archive responds: Why we released the National Emergency Library • Hacker News Board

Re: Internet Archive responds: Why we released the National Emergency Library

#11

Post by sp332 » Mon, Mar 30, 2020, 10:11 PM UTC

thelean12 wrote: post #2

Why reimplement waitlists later if this is legal? Is the answer that it probably isn't legal and they're just hoping for the best here?

Copyright infringement is generally a civil matter. That means someone has to bother to sue you before there are legal consequences. They're betting that publishers won't take the PR hit of suing a non-profit providing a public service during an emergency. And since the opt-out is so easy, the amount of damages someone could claim are probably pretty darn small.

Re: Internet Archive responds: Why we released the National Emergency Library

#12

Post by phendrenad2 » Mon, Mar 30, 2020, 10:22 PM UTC

Anyone know which authors have opted out? It would be interesting to hear their reasons why in their own words.

Re: Internet Archive responds: Why we released the National Emergency Library

#13

Post by ddevault » Mon, Mar 30, 2020, 10:24 PM UTC

btilly wrote: post #8

jfengel wrote: post #7

So under ordinary circumstances, when they do their Controlled Digital Lending, for each copy they lend out there's an actual dead-tree book sitting on a shelf somewhere?

Exactly.

That is obscene. Screw copyright.

Re: Internet Archive responds: Why we released the National Emergency Library

#14

Post by dang » Mon, Mar 30, 2020, 10:24 PM UTC

Recent and related:

https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=22716923

https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=22731637

https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=22715009

https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=22681132

Re: Internet Archive responds: Why we released the National Emergency Library

#15

Post by pessimizer » Mon, Mar 30, 2020, 10:40 PM UTC

ddevault wrote: post #13

btilly wrote: post #8

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Exactly.

That is obscene . Screw copyright.

I wouldn't call it obscene; having a physical copy is a good backup. Maybe we could say we're allowing digital lending libraries to violate copyrights enough to distribute copies over the internet as long as they contribute to physical conservation as well.

Re: Internet Archive responds: Why we released the National Emergency Library

#16

Post by mirimir » Mon, Mar 30, 2020, 10:45 PM UTC

phendrenad2 wrote: post #12

Anyone know which authors have opted out? It would be interesting to hear their reasons why in their own words.

One would hope that there's a notice to that effect, when users attempt to access their works.

Re: Internet Archive responds: Why we released the National Emergency Library

#17

Post by marvindanig » Mon, Mar 30, 2020, 10:45 PM UTC

pessimizer wrote: post #15

ddevault wrote: post #13

Earlier quoted context omitted.

That is obscene . Screw copyright.

I wouldn't call it obscene; having a physical copy is a good backup. Maybe we could say we're allowing digital lending libraries to violate copyrights enough to distribute copies over the internet as long as they contribute to physical conservation as well.

yikes, those dead trees mean zero backup or conservation as opposed to distributed storage off of the web. this is a lame miscarriage of a copyright law that is outdated.

Re: Internet Archive responds: Why we released the National Emergency Library

#18

Post by dvduval » Mon, Mar 30, 2020, 10:50 PM UTC

There are lots of children still going to school, and there's no simple way for them to obtain books that previously would have been available for free. It is sort of a reading emergency!

Now where I live the library system is awesome, and I found the selection was way better than Barnes & Noble.

Libraries purchase a lot of books every year and it's no small amount of money. That being said it's also wasteful for many people to buy a book only to read it once. So we need to put more thought into how we can do this so we aren't so wasteful.

Re: Internet Archive responds: Why we released the National Emergency Library

#19

Post by fenwick67 » Mon, Mar 30, 2020, 10:50 PM UTC

jfengel wrote: post #7

So under ordinary circumstances, when they do their Controlled Digital Lending, for each copy they lend out there's an actual dead-tree book sitting on a shelf somewhere?

Fun fact, there is a service called Console Classix that does this with classic game ROMs (NES, SNES etc). The cartridges sit around on shelves, then if you play a game they basically reserve that copy for you, which they say clears them of any copyright issues. It sounds sketchy but they've been in business renting ROMs for over 10 years and they're still around.

Re: Internet Archive responds: Why we released the National Emergency Library

#20

Post by jfengel » Mon, Mar 30, 2020, 10:54 PM UTC

pessimizer wrote: post #15

ddevault wrote: post #13

Earlier quoted context omitted.

That is obscene . Screw copyright.

I wouldn't call it obscene; having a physical copy is a good backup. Maybe we could say we're allowing digital lending libraries to violate copyrights enough to distribute copies over the internet as long as they contribute to physical conservation as well.

In this case, it's not about backups. It's about extending the notion of a "library" to Internet. The publisher still gets all of the usual money that they'd get from selling a book, and the library gets to lend it out subject to the same constraints they'd have on lending out a physical book. They "lend" one digital copy per physical copy.

That's still not entirely in keeping with the limited domain that libraries used to have, where lending out a book came with a physical cost of getting it to the patron. But it's close enough for reasonable opinions to differ.

So it's about preserving the structure by which book people (not just authors, but editors, publicists, publishers, layout, cover artists, etc) get paid.