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

Activists rally to save Internet Archive as lawsuit threatens site

decrypt.co

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

201–210 of 409 posts

Re: Activists rally to save Internet Archive as lawsuit threatens site

#201

Post by ComputerGuru »

kerkeslager wrote: post #199
sukilot wrote: post #195

Earlier quoted context omitted.

You can't when organizations make blunders that destroy themselves.

I can, do, and will. There has to be room in the charity ecosystem for organizations that take risks. It remains to be seen whether this blunder will actually destroy the Internet Archive. In general, I think the idea that good things have to last forever is overrated. Organizations willing to compromise their values eventually drift away from those values completely, which is worse than simply ceasing to exist--such…

How is staying out of this altogether “compromising their principles?”

Re: Activists rally to save Internet Archive as lawsuit threatens site

#202

Post by manigandham »

coldpie wrote: post #119
manigandham wrote: post #64

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Just because the marginal cost of a copy is zero does not mean there's no value in the information, and it's perfectly reasonable to gate access to that value. Copying a video file is free too but I'm sure you wouldn't argue that anyone can watch a movie for free just because someone else made it. People have a right to own and control the distribution of their works that they invested in creating.

> People have a right to own and control the distribution of their works that they invested in creating. I don't agree. People should be paid for the work they do, yes, but look at all the crap we've had to put up with for trying to restrict an infinite supply. The right model is to pay people to do work, not to pay them for having done work. Yes, it's hard to transition from one model to the other, but the inability…

What did you have to put up with?

How do you pay people to "do work" instead of "done work"? What's that mean exactly?

Re: Activists rally to save Internet Archive as lawsuit threatens site

#203

Post by kerkeslager »

ComputerGuru wrote: post #201
kerkeslager wrote: post #199

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I can, do, and will. There has to be room in the charity ecosystem for organizations that take risks. It remains to be seen whether this blunder will actually destroy the Internet Archive. In general, I think the idea that good things have to last forever is overrated. Organizations willing to compromise their values eventually drift away from those values completely, which is worse than simply ceasing to exist--such…

How is staying out of this altogether “compromising their principles?”

"Our mission is to provide Universal Access to All Knowledge."[1]

That is pretty unambiguous.

[1] https://archive.org/about/

EDIT: The previous version of this post was unnecessarily combative, in response to what may have been a good faith question. Sorry.

Re: Activists rally to save Internet Archive as lawsuit threatens site

#204

Post by shervinafshar »

lordlimecat wrote: post #186
MrStonedOne wrote: post #26

Earlier quoted context omitted.

>I honestly don't understand why they did it. Its right there in the article. >In March, as the COVID-19 pandemic led to the shutdown of public libraries , the Internet Archive created the National Emergency Library and temporarily suspended book waitlists Public libraries got shut down, they opened a replacement. Makes perfect sense to me.

>Public libraries got shut down, they opened a replacement And they did it in the most blatantly illegal way possible, with a press release that removed any doubt as to whether the infringement was willful. Brilliant! IA could have, for instance, reached out to local libraries to see if IA could "use" their physical copies for proxies of the digital ones IA was loaning. This would likely have been illegal, but far mo…

Not a IP lawyer here, but I speculate that when and if this lawsuit goes to higher courts, the fact that IA was acting in favour of the public in a national emergency would be in their favor.

Re: Activists rally to save Internet Archive as lawsuit threatens site

#205

Post by mburns »

sukilot wrote: post #194
waheoo wrote: post #178

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Last i checked rosa parks did something illegal too. Not all laws need to be followed. And just because some people will beleive anything doesnt make this belief any less relevant or important.

No, she didn't! Rosa Parks launched a boycott to protest a bus system that was so racist that even the horrific Jim Crow laws weren't enough for bus drivers who kicked off black people (and police officers who arrested them) who had a legal right to their seats. Other protests broke the law with sit-ins.

Rosa Parks was arrested and convicted for breaking a city law.

Re: Activists rally to save Internet Archive as lawsuit threatens site

#206

Post by manigandham »

matheusmoreira wrote: post #113
manigandham wrote: post #64

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Just because the marginal cost of a copy is zero does not mean there's no value in the information, and it's perfectly reasonable to gate access to that value. Copying a video file is free too but I'm sure you wouldn't argue that anyone can watch a movie for free just because someone else made it. People have a right to own and control the distribution of their works that they invested in creating.

> it's perfectly reasonable to gate access to that value It's also perfectly reasonable to distribute that information widely and without limits. The fact information is valuable to someone doesn't make it scarce. The harsh reality that creators need to face is that only the first copy need be paid for. > I'm sure you wouldn't argue that anyone can watch a movie for free just because someone else made it I would. Ins…

The law is how control is enforced. The same way we handle other unwanted or criminal actions.

Just because you can do something does not give you the right or permission to do so. You can drive all over the road, or ride the train without a ticket, or walk out of the store without paying. But you wouldn't because it's against the law.

As far as crowdfunding, some projects have already taken that route but the results have shown that it doesn't really support the AAA content that consumers demand. If you think you can convince millions of people to pay upfront for content, and enough to outweigh all the free consumers, then I'm sure the industry would be very happy to hear from you.

Re: Activists rally to save Internet Archive as lawsuit threatens site

#207

Post by Vinnl »

jacquesm wrote: post #89

I have three favorite properties on the web: Wikipedia, the Khan Academy and the Internet Archive. Whoever thought this was a good idea should own up to it and step down, this was a dumb move if there ever was one and risking one of the prime - and very fragile - properties on the web like this was highly irresponsible. Keep in mind that IA already has plenty of enemies who are continuously monitoring it and hoping t…

That's a good list, but OpenStreetMaps should really be added to it :)

Re: Activists rally to save Internet Archive as lawsuit threatens site

#208

Post by manigandham »

sergeykish wrote: post #159
manigandham wrote: post #64

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Just because the marginal cost of a copy is zero does not mean there's no value in the information, and it's perfectly reasonable to gate access to that value. Copying a video file is free too but I'm sure you wouldn't argue that anyone can watch a movie for free just because someone else made it. People have a right to own and control the distribution of their works that they invested in creating.

Interestingly a lot of films (like Transformers and Fast and Furious franchises) cost a lot, yet are incredibly boring. Pulp Fiction, Blade Runner had much smaller budget. And Youtube rocks on modest earnings. It is like AAA vs indie games - Undertale is incredible (as many AAA games are). I do not argue against ownership. Just of ability of big money to hide lack of story. It happens that books live in most open (pa…

That's an entirely different issue. There are still good movies being made but the high budget blockbusters have to appeal to an ever broader audience, often with international releases, so the story is usually just mediocre enough to pass.

Re: Activists rally to save Internet Archive as lawsuit threatens site

#209

Post by squarefoot »

Ensorceled wrote: post #164
linuxhansl wrote: post #21

"Hachette, HarperCollins, Penguin Random House, and Wiley [...] sued the organization." Noted. I'll spend my money elsewhere.

Well, you were not spending money there anyway if you were downloading your books from IA ...

For what is worth, I didn't download anything by those publishers from the IA during the pandemic, but have for sure some physical books from Penguin and Wiley in my library. I took notes anyway to never buy anything again from those publishers, not even as a gift.

Re: Activists rally to save Internet Archive as lawsuit threatens site

#210

Post by coldpie »

Ajedi32 wrote: post #187
coldpie wrote: post #119

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> People have a right to own and control the distribution of their works that they invested in creating. I don't agree. People should be paid for the work they do, yes, but look at all the crap we've had to put up with for trying to restrict an infinite supply. The right model is to pay people to do work, not to pay them for having done work. Yes, it's hard to transition from one model to the other, but the inability…

That's an interesting perspective. What system would you propose to allow people to be "paid to do" this sort of creative work in a fair manner? Particularly since it's not always clear what the value of that work is until you see the finished product. (E.g. It's possible for two movies with identical multi-million dollar budgets to be produced, and one to turn out to be unwatchable garbage and the other a masterpiec…

It's a good question, and I don't know. Perhaps some model like Patreon; perhaps just having voluntary payments (actually not dissimilar to what we have now, which seems to be working reasonably well); perhaps sponsored by wealthy individuals or corporations; perhaps something I haven't thought of. People would figure it out, and we could finally stop trying to pretend that you can prevent computers from copying bits.
Post reply on HN