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

121–130 of 242 posts

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

#121

Post by manquer »

MayeulC wrote: post #87
neltnerb wrote: post #46

Earlier quoted context omitted.

It's less debatable if the libraries they partner with have records showing that said books were on the stacks behind locked doors and that they used these records to change the number of each title that can be loaned out. But it is still a pretty big shift in "how to count" that maybe would have gone over better if discussed first. But let's be realistic, the publishers would have done the same thing. They do it ove…

> I also think copyrights should last like 20-30 years tops Seriously, I can't fathom why anyone would say that copyright should last longer than patents

Simple it is money . It is hard to make money on patents twenty years after initial filing or invention . It is considerably easier to do so with copyright.

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

#122

Post by patrickhogan1 »

thatcat wrote: post #59
patrickhogan1 wrote: post #25

I love the IA. But it is so clear the argument made is written by a lawyer after the fact. Reading between the lines of the lawyer speak: 1. The books were not locked up and out of the reach of students. Students were able to take their books home. Yes class was over Zoom. Teaching from the same books previously used in the physical classroom. College classes have done this for decades using physical books for online…

>Library cards are limited to city residents. For example, think of a city with 1M residents. That puts a cap on the license cost. So you're saying that the amount libraries pay for a book is proportional to the number of residents in that city?

100%

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

#123

Post by nordsieck »

nitrogen wrote: post #83
aahhahahaaa wrote: post #61

Earlier quoted context omitted.

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…

I'm astonished and dismayed by all the comments calling for capitulation. It's very clear that the publishers in this case are bullies, plain and simple. You don't kneel to bullies if you want them to stop, you fight back. Not to do so leads to tyranny and feudalism, where the whims of the large become the law.

> I'm astonished and dismayed by all the comments calling for capitulation. It's very clear that the publishers in this case are bullies, plain and simple.

That's not clear to me at all.

Here are IA's words:

"as of today, March 24, 2020, the Internet Archive will suspend waitlists for the 1.4 million (and growing) books in our lending library by creating a National Emergency Library to serve the nation’s displaced learners. ... During the waitlist suspension, users will be able to borrow books from the National Emergency Library without joining a waitlist"[1]

That's pretty open and flagrant copyright violation, even if you believe that controlled digital lending is legal, which isn't clear. Piracy isn't a criminal offense - it's a tort. The way to halt and recover from the damages of a tort is to file suit.

___

1. https://blog.archive.org/2020/03/24/announcing-a-national-em...

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

#124

Post by patrickhogan1 »

horsawlarway wrote: post #118
nine_k wrote: post #98

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I think this does not mesh well with their mission. They are the Internet Archive , the archive of freely (in the past) available stuff that can't be found anywhere else, in most cases. This is much more fragile than old books which likely exists in thousands of copies anyway. I do not admire their stance, and am unhappy that they are recklessly jeopardizing their unique thing to make a case where they have a very bi…

I understand you, and vehemently disagree. There is a real and serious risk of having ALL published material eventually fall under "licensed use" instead of ownership. We're rapidly tipping towards a society where you pay rent to license everything, and own nothing. In the short term, I find this model abusive. In the long I think it guarantees we will have a competitive disadvantage against countries that don't enfo…

IA does NOT own the books. IA is only referencing that they own some of the books to distract readers. The vast majority of books IA is “lending” come from the purported “endorsement” from 130 libraries. Yet there is no explanation if the endorsement means a general “Hey we love IA” or “a contractual relationship that allows IA to lend out copyrighted works licensed by the endorsing library”

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

#125

Post by patrickhogan1 »

pyk wrote: post #102
aahhahahaaa wrote: post #61

Earlier quoted context omitted.

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.

Should you also bully self-published authors? With knowledge of how hard it is to become a full time author already.

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

#126

Post by grawprog »

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 makes me sad we live in a society where profit is the first and foremost consideration for anything. Preserving history, human creativity, the progress of society, the betterment of future generations all comes second to profit. How many things will get or have been lost to time or just lost in general because they didn't make or cut into profit?

The internet archive may have its faults, but its value to humanity is something that should be considered. It's sad it won't be. The only consideration will be how they cut into profit and on those grounds they will be penalized.

I realize this isn't the audience for this kind of comment, what with being a news site for a profit driven startup culture, but this profit driven culture we have is going to destroy so much before we even realize what we've lost.

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

#127

Post by remram »

Apocryphon wrote: post #63
remram wrote: post #48

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I had a recurring donation until they decided to take a step that was obviously going to get them sued. I support IA's mission and products, but won't throw money in legal proceedings they set themselves to lose; I feel like this is better spent on EFF etc who are serious about it. I object to modern intellectual property and publishing practices as much as anyone, but what did they expect would happen when they drop…

The EFF is taking up the legal defense in this suit, so your donation would be ending up at the same place anyway.

I knew that! And I have no problem with it, since EFF are upfront about what the money is for (and are probably better/more rational about the battles they pick)

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

#128

Post by icebraining »

patrickhogan1 wrote: post #124
horsawlarway wrote: post #118

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I understand you, and vehemently disagree. There is a real and serious risk of having ALL published material eventually fall under "licensed use" instead of ownership. We're rapidly tipping towards a society where you pay rent to license everything, and own nothing. In the short term, I find this model abusive. In the long I think it guarantees we will have a competitive disadvantage against countries that don't enfo…

IA does NOT own the books. IA is only referencing that they own some of the books to distract readers. The vast majority of books IA is “lending” come from the purported “endorsement” from 130 libraries. Yet there is no explanation if the endorsement means a general “Hey we love IA” or “a contractual relationship that allows IA to lend out copyrighted works licensed by the endorsing library”

That was only during the Emergency event, when the libraries were closed, and which they already ended.

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

#129

Post by mulmen »

grawprog wrote: post #126
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 makes me sad we live in a society where profit is the first and foremost consideration for anything. Preserving history, human creativity, the progress of society, the betterment of future generations all comes second to profit. How many things will get or have been lost to time or just lost in general because they didn't make or cut into profit? The internet archive may have its faults, but its value to humanity…

I think that's an unfair take on the law. If you create something you decide what happens with it. That seems reasonable to me.

Why are the rest of us entitled to your creation?

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

#130

Post by 542458 »

bscphil wrote: post #101
ApolloFortyNine wrote: post #21

Earlier quoted context omitted.

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.

This justification appears to have happened after the fact - As far as I can tell the endorsing library program postdates the National Emergency Library. They’ve never mentioned the endorsing library program in connection with the NEL until very recently that I can see.

Additionally, they explicitly waived all waitlists when they launched the program, and spoke about is as if controlled lending had been temporarily abandoned (whereas now they’re saying it was still CDL, just with a larger source pool). As far as I can tell, this is all a post-hoc attempt to make the whole affair more legal.

Post reply on HN