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

221–230 of 409 posts

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

#221

Post by themodelplumber »

Mindwipe wrote: post #128
themodelplumber wrote: post #31

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I commented elsewhere but I find this a terrific example of a bold prospective move in this space. They took a risk for which the patron reward ratio was potentially huge. Also, publishers should have anticipated this sort of thing and prepared bridges so they didn't have to go on the attack and waste 10 different types of capital. That they are shutting down a public benefit with relevant impact (IA release gives an…

> Also, publishers should have anticipated this sort of thing and prepared bridges so they didn't have to go on the attack and waste 10 different types of capital. Publishers repeatedly asked the IA to stop obviously breaking the law before filing the lawsuit, and were ignored.

If that's all they did, it makes one wonder if the publishing corporate leadership teams understand how laws are made, or rewritten? They completely missed their interface with IA.

IA now has a lot of social leverage thanks to these publishers being about as creative and flexible as a concrete patio.

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

#222

Post by mindslight »

jacquesm wrote: post #92
echelon wrote: post #25

Could the Internet Archive donate its holdings to a new nonprofit? If the servers were transferred to a new custodian and the anticipated bandwidth charges were paid forward, then what would they have to lose?

Adding bankruptcy fraud to the list of items on the docket is likely not the best way forward.

The data stored on the disk drives is what the world values, but it actually has very little economic value. Internet Archive should start selling off the storage/server setup to a different nonprofit at fair market value ("Internet Cloud"), and renting continued access. If some eventual creditor wants to claim that the specific data collection on the disks had a value that was improperly sheltered from bankruptcy, they would be free to make a copy.

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

#223

Post by CivBase »

ComputerGuru wrote: post #27

I warned about this very outcome when they announced the initiative [0]. The Internet Archive is too big and too important to gamble on this short term of a win (giving everyone free and unlimited access to all books for a few months at most). Assuming the organization continues to exist after this ordeal, their entire board should step down for putting at risk one of the most invaluable archives in existence. I’m an…

Agreed. Or at least every board member that supported the action should be expected to step down.

I really want the service provided by IA to continue. Even though I have never used it, I recognize how valuable it is to humanity as a whole. But if the people running organization providing that service are going to jeopardize it like that, then they must take responsibility.

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

#224

Post by linuxhansl »

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 ...

I didn't. I sometime "sample" books online before I decide to buy them.

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

#225

Post by nix23 »

dhosek wrote: post #216
nix23 wrote: post #161

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Same here! That is a digital lending system like every other public-library does it...

No, it really isn't. Library contracts for digital lending vary based on publisher and service provider, but aside from some very small publishers (if that), there is no publisher that allows for unlimited unmetered lending of e-books and certainly not for the price of a print book. Note also that physical books face physical wear and usually have to be retired after 25–40 (at most) lends.

>allows for unlimited unmetered lending of e-books

It is metered, you can lend max 5 book for max of 1 month.

>Note also that physical books face physical wear and usually have to be retired after 25–40 (at most) lends

Is that something positive? Should we go back to DVD because publishers would love that, or is streaming still ok?

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

#226

Post by danaris »

raxxorrax wrote: post #74
beebmam wrote: post #36

Earlier quoted context omitted.

For me, I can't help but place blame on the actual agents of its potential demise: the plaintiffs of this lawsuit

Yes, I think that perspective is actually more relevant, even if the IA might have made a mistake. But I see only victims in this conflict. Most authors today don't really eat with golden spoons and to have an organisation that helps them get their fair share of the work they put into the books is certainly necessary in the internet age. On the other hand the internet archive is an extremely valuable service. I hope…

The authors aren't involved in this, unfortunately.

The plaintiffs here are publishers—you know, the ones who take the vast majority of all profit from all book sales, despite massive increases in scalability over the past century.

If the plaintiffs win this, authors won't see a cent.

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

#227

Post by zucker42 »

jakeogh wrote: post #41
ComputerGuru wrote: post #27

I warned about this very outcome when they announced the initiative [0]. The Internet Archive is too big and too important to gamble on this short term of a win (giving everyone free and unlimited access to all books for a few months at most). Assuming the organization continues to exist after this ordeal, their entire board should step down for putting at risk one of the most invaluable archives in existence. I’m an…

archive.org is a primary target for the book burners. As with any big thorn; they dont need coordination to attack it; it's practically a law of nature. https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=20623177 Archive team: is there a 101 on getting pages? I struggle to archive the things I want because of the JS interface and the generated data. I just want the links to the original GET 's and source files. Torrents for the lo…

https://www.reddit.com/r/DataHoarder/comments/h02jl4/lets_sa...

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

#228

Post by dhosek »

nix23 wrote: post #225
dhosek wrote: post #216

Earlier quoted context omitted.

No, it really isn't. Library contracts for digital lending vary based on publisher and service provider, but aside from some very small publishers (if that), there is no publisher that allows for unlimited unmetered lending of e-books and certainly not for the price of a print book. Note also that physical books face physical wear and usually have to be retired after 25–40 (at most) lends.

>allows for unlimited unmetered lending of e-books It is metered, you can lend max 5 book for max of 1 month. >Note also that physical books face physical wear and usually have to be retired after 25–40 (at most) lends Is that something positive? Should we go back to DVD because publishers would love that, or is streaming still ok?

It's an observation that points out that physical books are not being lent out hundred or thousands of times so the physical book argument (or the digitized physical book argument) don't hold water.

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

#229

Post by dehrmann »

zucker42 wrote: post #62
dehrmann wrote: post #19

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I used to work for Spotify, and pretty much everything we did with music, lyrics, or album art had to go through legal, and projects often had to get label approval. This is just how you do things when you're working with IP. It is a bit surprising that a non-profit dedicated to archiving knowledge doesn't have more experience with IP law. Not even lawyer-level, just enough to know when CC general counsel.

https://techcrunch.com/2018/12/20/spotify-settles-the-1-6b-c... > The complaint had alleged that “Spotify brazenly disregards United States Copyright law and has committed willful, ongoing copyright infringement,” it said. Note that I'm not saying Spotify did anything wrong in this case, but it does show two things. 1. Big companies can manipulate the system better than nonprofits or individuals. 2. Publishers sue to…

This is a much better article on the Wixen lawsuit (be careful when you come across iTunes it it; it might refer to downloads, not streaming): https://www.theverge.com/2018/3/14/17117160/spotify-mechanic...

IIRC, the problem was that Spotify didn't know who to pay because there isn't a list of song to song writer, unlike song to label. Apple Music had the same problem.

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

#230

Post by zucker42 »

jessriedel wrote: post #174
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.

>>I honestly don't understand why they did it. >Its right there in the article. The grandparent isn't questioning the motivation for breaking the law, they are asking why the organization would possibly think it's a good idea given the likely consequences. Q: "Why do you rob banks?" A: "Because that's where the money is."

To pick an analogy that is biased in favor of the IA, isn't it a better comparison to say,

Q: "Why did you violate that segregation law?"

A: "Because it's immoral and bad for society."

Post reply on HN