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

My thoughts in response to the lawsuit against the Internet Archive

blog.archive.org

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

101–110 of 242 posts

Re: My thoughts in response to the lawsuit against the Internet Archive

#101

Post by bscphil »

ApolloFortyNine wrote: post #21
joshuahaglund wrote: post #19

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Using controlled digital lending, yes. Why not? The libraries hold licenses to lend this media in physical format but were temporarily shifting to lending using controlled digital lending. They didn't just give away unencrypted copies to be pirated. They did what libraries do, lend media.

They lent unlimited copies. The limit is very very key to being covered under CDL.

The article itself appears to be claiming this is not true: every book they lent was endorsed by a backing library, such that the physical book was guaranteed to be sitting in the stacks, not lent to anyone, whenever the digital copy of the book was in circulation.

Re: My thoughts in response to the lawsuit against the Internet Archive

#102

Post by pyk »

aahhahahaaa wrote: post #61
dmurray wrote: post #50

> With this suit, the publishers are saying that in the digital world, we cannot buy books anymore, we can only license and on their terms; we can only preserve in ways for which they have granted explicit permission, and for only as long as they grant permission; and we cannot lend what we have paid for because we do not own it. This is not a rule of law, this is the rule by license. This does not make sense. If tha…

It's in their best interest to settle in a capitulating way that will hurt them but not kill them. This might have to include a public apology that admits they're in the wrong because publishers can be petty about this type of thing. It doesn't seem like they're willing to do that, and while I agree with their viewpoint and the troubling future with licensing... it may be the hill they die on and I'm not sure it's wo…

Any way to refocus on the bully publishers? Boycott these folks (Hachette, Harpercollins, Wiley, and Penguin Random House) so they respect the public service IA is giving to millions of people - beyond just the content in question. Actions can speak wonders.

Re: My thoughts in response to the lawsuit against the Internet Archive

#103

Post by aw1621107 »

avemilia wrote: post #100

> Controlled Digital Lending is a respectful and balanced way to bring our print collections to digital learners. A physical book, once digital, is available to only one reader at a time. I never understood this "lending" practice. Can somebody explain? Sounds like obscurantism to me. So, if there is only one digitally scanned copy of an old book, only one person on planet Earth can borrow it? Because I remember a fe…

My impression was that "lending" digital copies this way is less likely to upset publishers, since it's more or less analogous to the already-acceptable practice of checking out physical books from a library.

Allowing an arbitrary number of simultaneous readers would take better advantage of the digital format, but is much more likely to attract a lawsuit.

Re: My thoughts in response to the lawsuit against the Internet Archive

#104

Post by rocqua »

wittyreference wrote: post #99
mjevans wrote: post #74

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The First Sale doctrine SHOULD apply, As someone else replied in a sibling comment. A digital sale should be just that, a perpetual license that can be transferred, inherited, etc.

First Sale doctrine evenly applied to digital books would allow you to freely resell the ebook you purchased. It probably wouldn't mean allowing you to make infinite copies and distribute them freely, abolishing the market for the actual book. Yes, that's not the technical definition of FS doctrine, but that doctrine was written before this technological context existed .

Thing is, the IA did not make infinite copies and distribute them freely. They specifically made limited copies and for every copy the lent out, they took a physical copy out of circulation.

Re: My thoughts in response to the lawsuit against the Internet Archive

#105

Post by nashashmi »

This article is very well written and very helpful. It presents the case for digital lending quite well.

But in the last 20 years, pirates have abused digital copies of data and given digital copies a bad name.

Today the publishers are sore from that experience. And they fight like they always did before.

But they will use court cases against pirates to justify suit against IA. And that sucks.

Judges worldwide have sided with opposing sides on the issue. No consistency has been reached. It is clear that courts cannot interpret these issues with consistency.

So legislatives must CREATE rules for digital content and digitized content. And they are not the same. The latter is conversion of data into a less than digital format and this takes effort, the kind of effort like buying tires, creating molds for them, and distributing tires made from those molds.

Current copyright laws do not distinguish between digital and paper products. Paper products before year 2000 should be digitizable. After should need to be paid a fee. And lending should be clarified.

Re: My thoughts in response to the lawsuit against the Internet Archive

#106

Post by pwdisswordfish2 »

dmurray wrote: post #50

> With this suit, the publishers are saying that in the digital world, we cannot buy books anymore, we can only license and on their terms; we can only preserve in ways for which they have granted explicit permission, and for only as long as they grant permission; and we cannot lend what we have paid for because we do not own it. This is not a rule of law, this is the rule by license. This does not make sense. If tha…

The author is obviously not paraphrasing the arguments IA's lawyers will make. See links below for what IA will argue.

https://controlleddigitallending.org/

https://controlleddigitallending.org/statement

https://controlleddigitallending.org/signatories

https://controlleddigitallending.org/whitepaper

Re: My thoughts in response to the lawsuit against the Internet Archive

#107

Post by rocqua »

avemilia wrote: post #100

> Controlled Digital Lending is a respectful and balanced way to bring our print collections to digital learners. A physical book, once digital, is available to only one reader at a time. I never understood this "lending" practice. Can somebody explain? Sounds like obscurantism to me. So, if there is only one digitally scanned copy of an old book, only one person on planet Earth can borrow it? Because I remember a fe…

It is using the existing carve out for library book lending in the physical world, and applying it to the digital world.

So if the book is old enough to not be covered by copyright, they can distribute as many copies as the want. Otherwise, in order to use the library carve-out, they need to limit it to the number of physical copies taken out of circulation in actual libraries.

Re: My thoughts in response to the lawsuit against the Internet Archive

#108

Post by rocqua »

basch wrote: post #82
roblabla wrote: post #55

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Both can be correct at the same time. Pirating a movie is copyright infringement, not stealing. Digital lending is currently legally gray-zone, but the pragmatic end-game for lenders is to make it so a physical book can be digitally lent so long as the physical book is unused during the lending period. This is because it can easily be shown that the publisher doesn't incur damages, since the same amount of books are…

Now I'm waiting for a Netflix of lending, where I declare what movies I physically own, and can lend them out for credits to watch other movies. The middle man distributes a digital copy. You agree to legal responsible for any movies they distribute, that you claimed you physically owned but don't.

I believe that old movie-rental-stores needed more of a license than just owning the movies in order to rent them out for money.

Re: My thoughts in response to the lawsuit against the Internet Archive

#109

Post by wittyreference »

rocqua wrote: post #104
wittyreference wrote: post #99

Earlier quoted context omitted.

First Sale doctrine evenly applied to digital books would allow you to freely resell the ebook you purchased. It probably wouldn't mean allowing you to make infinite copies and distribute them freely, abolishing the market for the actual book. Yes, that's not the technical definition of FS doctrine, but that doctrine was written before this technological context existed .

Thing is, the IA did not make infinite copies and distribute them freely. They specifically made limited copies and for every copy the lent out, they took a physical copy out of circulation.

I don't see anything in IA's FAQ or elsewhere that they limited digital lending to physical copies. I read that they only lent ebooks they had physical possession /of/, but that there was no limit to how many such copies they lent out (i.e., they had one physical copy of Mark Twain, allowed an unlimited number of people to digitally borrow Mark Twain for up to two weeks).

If I'm mistaken, I'd appreciate a link that explains their approach.

Re: My thoughts in response to the lawsuit against the Internet Archive

#110

Post by Spooky23 »

rocqua wrote: post #104
wittyreference wrote: post #99

Earlier quoted context omitted.

First Sale doctrine evenly applied to digital books would allow you to freely resell the ebook you purchased. It probably wouldn't mean allowing you to make infinite copies and distribute them freely, abolishing the market for the actual book. Yes, that's not the technical definition of FS doctrine, but that doctrine was written before this technological context existed .

Thing is, the IA did not make infinite copies and distribute them freely. They specifically made limited copies and for every copy the lent out, they took a physical copy out of circulation.

Then they did the emergency Covid library, where they just gave copies of everything away.
Post reply on HN