Activists rally to save Internet Archive as lawsuit threatens site • Hacker News Board

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

#381

Post by lordlimecat » Fri, Jun 12, 2020, 2:05 PM UTC

Dylan16807 wrote: post #341

lordlimecat wrote: post #252

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The argument being put forward here is as if IA just broken into peoples houses and redistributed 3m masks, and tried to justify it because they're doing good.

I agree! Many people are grossly exaggerating the harm so that they can scoff at the justification of "doing good".

The justification of doing good would land the perpetrators from my post in jail for breaking, entering, and theft.

We are a society of laws passed by representatives, not formed in one's mind on the spot.

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

#382

Post by shervinafshar » Fri, Jun 12, 2020, 2:14 PM UTC

lordlimecat wrote: post #380

shervinafshar wrote: post #263

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I can imagine the answer to all those questions from IA wouldn't be "because we are a law unto ourselves" as you suggested, but it would be along the lines that following bureaucratic channels during a national emergency to be able to help the public with availability of books, would have been slow and hence counterproductive. In this country, laws have a interesting way to bend during national crises. I'll keep my f…

>following bureaucratic channels ...would have been slow and hence counterproductive. The courts will understand this to effectively be "we are a law unto ourselves". Those determinations are properly made by the mayor, governor, president, or legislative body-- not some random .org.

"random .org"? IA? That concludes our fun conversation from my point of view. We'll just have to wait and see.

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

#383

Post by Zonulet » Fri, Jun 12, 2020, 2:52 PM UTC

coldpie wrote: post #210

Ajedi32 wrote: post #187

Earlier quoted context omitted.

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…

I am an author in the middle of my career. I make my living on book sales. Personally I would prefer not to gamble my survival on this airy assumption that "people would figure it out".

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

#384

Post by Zonulet » Fri, Jun 12, 2020, 2:56 PM UTC

danaris wrote: post #226

raxxorrax wrote: post #74

Earlier quoted context omitted.

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.

I am an author, I'm published by one of the publishers involved, and I'm very happy that they're doing it.

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

#385

Post by zucker42 » Fri, Jun 12, 2020, 4:42 PM UTC

alwayseasy wrote: post #142

andromeduck wrote: post #51

Earlier quoted context omitted.

If I did the math right, it actually only costs about 72k per year to archive 6PB on Google cloud. Thats well within the range of one Googler's annual discretionary income.

sounds cheap! is bandwidth included?

0.01/GB

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

#386

Post by kick » Fri, Jun 12, 2020, 4:44 PM UTC

CivBase wrote: post #361

kick wrote: post #310

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I like OSM as much as anyone, but out of those four, it'd be fourth by a mile or two in terms of usefulness. The English Wikipedia (especially if including other Wikimedia projects) on its own would be practically enough to get humanity back to the current day if things were set back a few hundred years. The Internet Archive would be, too, and probably a bit further. OSM would just get you a slightly better map. That…

> That said, 'jacquesm's comment is beyond stupid, really. Name calling is not constructive.

I used a line from his own comment for that; check the last three words he used within.

Further, I didn't say he was. I said his comment was. Because it is.

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

#387

Post by zucker42 » Fri, Jun 12, 2020, 4:49 PM UTC

xhkkffbf wrote: post #349

intopieces wrote: post #262

Earlier quoted context omitted.

When America fixes copyright to be life of the author only, I will agree with your concerns.

Why treat authors differently than any other laborer? Does the ownership value in a house disappear when the carpenter dies? What about in car? Art takes work. It makes sense to give the artist something concrete that can be sold so the artist has a chance of earning a living. If that right is passed down to the kids, at least the artist has something to pass along, just like other laborers.

Houses and cars are scarce, while digital copies of a book are non-scarce.

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

#388

Post by aurizon » Fri, Jun 12, 2020, 5:03 PM UTC

Remember (the few that are over ~~600 years old might??:) ) Gutenberg invented movable type and a publication explosion followed. Heretofore books were hand copied, with errors etc. A medieval ~Xerox room was full of scribes - hard at work. A Xerox salesman who promised to double the speed of your copying - he walked in a hulking slave with a whip - all the monks visibly and hurriedly sped up. Back to Gutenberg, https://www.livescience.com/2569-gutenberg-changed-world.htm... the Authors fought printing presses, they fought even lending libraries. Books were often chained to the shelves to limit access as well as theft. https://www.amusingplanet.com/2015/04/the-last-surviving-cha...

So here we are now. Progress is hampered by the old farts, the author's guilds, the Enslaviers,(intentional typo on Elsevier) who want us to be in permanent economic thralldom to them. They are mere pebbls in the rivers of progress, so we pay them to go away, or break them up. MIT has the right idea. I wish the Nobel Committee would announce that they will only consider openly published knowledge for future prizes. I wish all governmental other funders of research would mandate open publication. I wish all past published work was declared open NOW!!

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

#389

Post by vulcan01 » Fri, Jun 12, 2020, 6:49 PM UTC

s1artibartfast wrote: post #364

vulcan01 wrote: post #214

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The fear is that the "someone" will be the selfsame publisher companies.

Why would they want 30 years of archived websites?

To prevent others from buying it, causing another lawsuit?

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

#390

Post by TaylorAlexander » Fri, Jun 12, 2020, 7:14 PM UTC

tekknik wrote: post #378

TaylorAlexander wrote: post #362

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Prusa 3D printers are open source. Their main product over the last several years has been the MK2 and MK3 line of printers. Millions of clones have been sold by well-equipped Chinese companies. The clones sell for 1/3 the price, but make some cost cutting measures to achieve low cost. The result is that there is plenty of room in the market for the first party company and the clones. Your suggestion that we outlaw b…

I actually didn’t mean the outlaw business thing as inflammatory. I challenge you to find a way to make this work when some can still make profit. I’m aware what you do on your Github, I looked it up. Interestingly I have many more public/oss repos than you. You have failed to address the point and gave one example of a company based around 3d printers. I challenge you to think about this across all industries and ho…

You’ve misunderstood my point. Companies in my opinion should not stop others from reproducing their work. This should not be something people can do any more than you can stop your neighbor from leaving their house.

I gave you a perfectly fine example of a company that works even in the current climate without needing such restrictions on competition. I believe it would work the same with washing machines and automobiles and farming equipment. Can you tell me why it would work for 3D printers and not washing machines?

Of course huge adjustments would need to be made. But we would find a balance.

You mentioned curing cancer. Why did the inventor of human made insulin sell the rights for $1? Because he wanted all to have access. It is only intellectual property that has made the price so high many are dying in America because of it. Is that the world you would prefer?