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

Publishers File Suit Against Internet Archive

publishers.org

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

111–120 of 358 posts

Re: Publishers File Suit Against Internet Archive

#111

Post by StormChaser_5 »

EvanAnderson wrote: post #68
StormChaser_5 wrote: post #57

Earlier quoted context omitted.

As a self published author I have to say that the publishing industry is providing a huge service to me and the rest of the industry here. The IA blatantly stole the work of thousands of people. They saw a problem and wanted to act - laudable. They could have done that be arranging to buy unique copies of each book they lent out. Or they could have tried to come to some agreement with the publishers. Or a bunch of ot…

They didn't "steal" anything. If you mean copyright infringement, say "copyright infringement". There's no scarcity involved-- nobody lost the use or ownership of any physical article-- so nothing was "stolen". re: your business model being sustainable if the current "industry" goes away - Maybe that ship has sailed. You can't make a living being a buggy whip manufacturer or an elevator operator anymore either.

I will agree that the writing is not stolen when you give every line of code produced by you or that you will produce in the future or any code produced by any company you have ever been part of or invested in to me for free to use as I wish.

Until then if you want to read an authors work then you need to pay their (usually very small) fee.

Re: Publishers File Suit Against Internet Archive

#112

Post by hashhar »

jasode wrote: post #72
zozbot234 wrote: post #61

Earlier quoted context omitted.

IA's lending is not unlimited, even with the National Emergency Library. The books are still restricted by DRM, they do keep track of how many copies are out for each book, and they do monitor the system to prevent abuse. It's a real library lending system, nothing like what they do with actual public domain works.

>IA's lending is not unlimited, even with the National Emergency Library. I'm not debating with you about the details since I haven't used IA's system myself but the last time this came up, a commenter explained that there were a bunch of loopholes in IA's "limits" that it was effectively "unlimited". E.g. after the checkout period expires, you just check out the ebook again. Again, I don't know if this is true. EDIT…

And how is that different from a physical library.

Re: Publishers File Suit Against Internet Archive

#113

Post by ryanmarsh »

Considering the number of people and organizations who've suffered the embarrassment of statements that didn't age well, thoughtlessly transcribed by IA, I'm surprised it took this long for someone to try and take them down.

I don't for a second believe this is motivated by anything but people who don't want a permanent public archive of the statements of powerful institutions and people.

Re: Publishers File Suit Against Internet Archive

#114

Post by ghaff »

Mindwipe wrote: post #103
VonGuard wrote: post #29

Earlier quoted context omitted.

They did it because the pandemic has closed libraries coast to coast, and it was a nice thing to do for people. Imagine that, making a decision not based on money or liability. I know, fuck them, right? /s

> They did it because the pandemic has closed libraries coast to coast, and it was a nice thing to do for people. Imagine that, making a decision not based on money or liability. You mean a stupid one that endangers everything else you do, yes? Robbing a bank and giving away the money is a decision not based on money or liability, but you shouldn't be very surprised you still get put in prison for it.

To say nothing of the fact that there are about 20,000 books at Project Gutenberg and countless other (legal) short stories, books, articles, etc. around the web. (And that's before talking video and other multimedia.)

It's not like there is some critical shortage of things to read online in the absence of the IA.

Re: Publishers File Suit Against Internet Archive

#115

Post by VonGuard »

ghaff wrote: post #114
Mindwipe wrote: post #103

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> They did it because the pandemic has closed libraries coast to coast, and it was a nice thing to do for people. Imagine that, making a decision not based on money or liability. You mean a stupid one that endangers everything else you do, yes? Robbing a bank and giving away the money is a decision not based on money or liability, but you shouldn't be very surprised you still get put in prison for it.

To say nothing of the fact that there are about 20,000 books at Project Gutenberg and countless other (legal) short stories, books, articles, etc. around the web. (And that's before talking video and other multimedia.) It's not like there is some critical shortage of things to read online in the absence of the IA.

You're both so right. The only thing that matters is money.

Re: Publishers File Suit Against Internet Archive

#116

Post by Shank »

weinzierl wrote: post #36

The Internet Archive does great work and please support them if you can[1]. Still, they are a single point of failure[2] and if they should falter one day it will be a big loss. What we really need - in my opinion - is a second mainstay - an archive of the archive so to speak. [1] https://archive.org/donate/ [2] Yes, I know about archive.today (formerly archive.is) but their extent is no way comparable to archive.org…

Archive.is/Archive.today is currently embroiled in a petty battle against CloudFlare DNS users, which is, imho, contrary to the spirit of an "archive" that is supposed to serve as a backup for things. I would rather support essentially any other service than one that actively tampers with DNS resolution for petty reasons.

https://community.cloudflare.com/t/1-1-1-1-does-not-resolve-...

Re: Publishers File Suit Against Internet Archive

#117

Post by yellowapple »

saagarjha wrote: post #9

> Despite the self-serving library branding of its operations, IA’s conduct bears little resemblance to the trusted role that thousands of American libraries play within their communities and as participants in the lawful copyright marketplace. IA scans books from cover to cover, posts complete digital files to its website, and solicits users to access them for free by signing up for Internet Archive Accounts. I wond…

Also, on that note, [citation needed] on the implicit claim that "signing up for Internet Archive Accounts" is necessary or even suggested to access the content on the Internet Archive. I've used the IA a lot, and not once did it even advertise the ability to create an account (beyond probably some Log-In/Sign-Up button somewhere that I didn't even notice), let alone require me to do so. Still don't have such an account.

Re: Publishers File Suit Against Internet Archive

#118

Post by JoshTriplett »

EvanAnderson wrote: post #80
space_fountain wrote: post #50

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I think this press release is missing an important details. While previously IA only allowed the same number of books that they owned to be lent out as part of their response to covid they've dropped that restriction. As much as I like IA if copyright is to continue to exist that can't be legal. http://blog.archive.org/2020/03/24/announcing-a-national-eme...

Copyright doesn't exist as boolean. It's a social contract-- a give and take between the owners of "intellectual property" and society-- and exists along a continuum. Copyright in the US has, in the last 50-ish years, taken a hard turn toward benefit for the owners of the "intellectual property" (not requiring registration anymore, increased duration of terms, the DMCA and everything that came along with it). I'd arg…

One clarification: copyright was never a (direct) tradeoff between desires of the public and desires of copyright holders. It's a tradeoff between two desires of the public: the public wants plenty of works created, and the public also want plenty of rights over those works (for purposes such as building more works upon them, remixing, etc). The desires of copyright holders should only enter into that indirectly, insofar as they result in the publication of more works that wouldn't have been published otherwise, and the public wants to make that trade.

With that in mind: for any given component of copyright law, we should be asking "what would not have been produced if this particular exclusive privilege didn't exist, and does the public want to make that trade?".

Re: Publishers File Suit Against Internet Archive

#120

Post by sudosysgen »

user5994461 wrote: post #60
BitwiseFool wrote: post #18

Earlier quoted context omitted.

If libraries weren't an ancient concept that preceeded copyright law they'd be illegal today.

Libraries would be only illegal in the US though, because all these copyright issues are US specific. Archive.org might as well rebase itself somewhere else.

And the US through it's massive influence and bullying would undoubtedly force it upon other countries, as they have done countless times including in the context of copyright.
Post reply on HN