Pirate Library Mirror: Preserving 7TB of books (that are not in Libgen) • Hacker News Board

Re: Pirate Library Mirror: Preserving 7TB of books (that are not in Libgen)

#341

Post by generalizations » Mon, Jul 04, 2022, 12:10 PM UTC

sacrosanct wrote: post #93

generalizations wrote: post #5

I wonder if there are any search engines dedicated to indexing these kinds of libraries. I know there's a decent one just for scihub, but it would be awesome if I could do a Google-style search that returned the contents of books, magazines and journal articles instead of just websites.

There is the Imperial Library of Trantor: https://trantor.is/ They offer a clearnet and a hidden service .onion incase you don’t want ISPs blocking access to it.

Unfortunately that doesn't do full text search, which is what I was trying to get at with the Google comparison.

I don't search for websites based on their titles...

Re: Pirate Library Mirror: Preserving 7TB of books (that are not in Libgen)

#342

Post by rakoo » Mon, Jul 04, 2022, 12:20 PM UTC

zasdffaa wrote: post #304

rakoo wrote: post #296

Earlier quoted context omitted.

This is the exact reason why copyleft licenses are important: you can reuse (A)GPL content, but if you do so the result must be given back to the community. If you're not going to pay anything, at least your product benefits everyone

The point is the licenses are irrelevant: The IP lawyer said they take quietly, they incorporate it into their products which they sell. the licences are being ignored . It's what she said.

BSD content can be taken without contributing back, it's in the license. Copyleft content cannot. That's the main difference, and even Google doesn't want to touch copyleft content with a 10-foot pole because of the fear they'd have to share their internal sauce, so I presume companies still take licenses into account.

Re: Pirate Library Mirror: Preserving 7TB of books (that are not in Libgen)

#343

Post by Tepix » Mon, Jul 04, 2022, 12:24 PM UTC

GTP wrote: post #321

If they are looking for seeders they should break the 7TB collection in multiple torrents, as I think most people don't have 7TB to spare

That appears to be what they are doing

Re: Pirate Library Mirror: Preserving 7TB of books (that are not in Libgen)

#344

Post by zasdffaa » Mon, Jul 04, 2022, 12:35 PM UTC

rakoo wrote: post #342

zasdffaa wrote: post #304

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The point is the licenses are irrelevant: The IP lawyer said they take quietly, they incorporate it into their products which they sell. the licences are being ignored . It's what she said.

BSD content can be taken without contributing back, it's in the license. Copyleft content cannot. That's the main difference, and even Google doesn't want to touch copyleft content with a 10-foot pole because of the fear they'd have to share their internal sauce, so I presume companies still take licenses into account.

Stop ignoring what I said. It's not about BSD licenses it's about more restrictive ones

You:

> This is the exact reason why copyleft licenses are important: you can reuse (A)GPL content, but if you do so the result must be given back to the community

Me: the frigging licences are being ignored. Giving back to the community is not happening. Code is being stolen. Are you trying to ignore what's being said?

Re: Pirate Library Mirror: Preserving 7TB of books (that are not in Libgen)

#345

Post by dkjaudyeqooe » Mon, Jul 04, 2022, 12:40 PM UTC

terrycody wrote: post #148

dkjaudyeqooe wrote: post #21

To be fair, Z-Library doesn't charge unless you want to download more than 10 books per 24 hour period. That's per account and although they ask you not to open multiple accounts they don't seem to do anything to stop you.

yes you are right, and due to this, I highly doubt how long they can maintain the service, hope it can lasts a long time...(though its illegal)

They've been going for many years. Lots of people donate and they have occasional donation drives where they raise 20,000 euros plus.

Re: Pirate Library Mirror: Preserving 7TB of books (that are not in Libgen)

#346

Post by krageon » Mon, Jul 04, 2022, 12:54 PM UTC

zasdffaa wrote: post #323

krageon wrote: post #315

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Within the larger context of this thread, the intent was clear. You yourself were responding to a post that gives this necessary context: Intellectual property is absurd and evil. The poster you reply to tells you why it is absurd and evil. Those two things together lead you naturally to the conclusion that it must be abolished. As such, I would say what they said is absolutely what I claimed. I just explained it in…

> Intellectual property is absurd and evil I don't agree, just the excessive enforcement of it may well be. > The fact that you summarised "this system must be destroyed" as "hopeless" says something No. What I said was: > hopeless valueless post. The post was valueless because it gives no direction, no means. And I detest such posts because they offer nothing useful. They are unconstructive. Hence are valueless.

With respect, if we can't even constructively discuss what you yourself said I think we will go nowhere and we are wasting each others' time.

Re: Pirate Library Mirror: Preserving 7TB of books (that are not in Libgen)

#347

Post by gatlin » Mon, Jul 04, 2022, 1:29 PM UTC

grumbel wrote: post #259

plmu wrote: post #210

Excellent. I hope more and more people start to see how absurd and evil the concept of "intellectual property" is. It should be totally rejected and any form of keeping useful information for yourself should be shunned and tabooized. In todays world, many have been programmed to believe that the would could not exits without such immoral restrictions, which is horrible.

I can't imagine getting rid of it completely would have good effects, as it would make any large scale production impossible. You might still get a few blog post, but getting books produced will be tricky and something big like a movie might be outright impossible. This is doubly true in the modern digital world were everything can be copied in a fraction of a second and where the piracy site, not the authors, will b…

It protects nothing important. That people must participate in selling their creativity and creative labors to eat is a more fundamental bug in society and as someone who makes a living off "IP" only I can't wait for the day that my life is secured by something other than armed threats of violence against people sharing ideas and information.

Re: Pirate Library Mirror: Preserving 7TB of books (that are not in Libgen)

#348

Post by shrimp_emoji » Mon, Jul 04, 2022, 1:33 PM UTC

grumbel wrote: post #275

rightbyte wrote: post #271

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> It could also result in far more draconian DRM, as that would be the only way left to protect your work. There is no way to protect video, audio or text from being copied. DRM just prevents low effort consumer copying.

There are plenty of ways. Limit playback only to official DRM-locked devices and have those devices film the user. The moment a camera makes it into the picture you block their account for life. That's not even new tech, 3D face detection is standard part of many smartphones and laptops. And companies like Facebook have no problem locking you out forever from their services, for much milder infractions. Or more pract…

>There are plenty of ways. ... have those devices film the user.

I think you've identified pretty much the only way (that I can think of, anyway). If you surveil all consumers and instantly arrest them the moment they make a copy, mission accomplished.

Short of that, though, as long as the data is being presented out in the open (light waves, sound waves, text), it's going to be possible to "rip" it.

Re: Pirate Library Mirror: Preserving 7TB of books (that are not in Libgen)

#349

Post by grumbel » Mon, Jul 04, 2022, 1:35 PM UTC

Beldin wrote: post #311

grumbel wrote: post #259

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I can't imagine getting rid of it completely would have good effects, as it would make any large scale production impossible. You might still get a few blog post, but getting books produced will be tricky and something big like a movie might be outright impossible. This is doubly true in the modern digital world were everything can be copied in a fraction of a second and where the piracy site, not the authors, will b…

> something in the realm of 20 years should be enough. God no. Right now, we'd be getting remakes from every piece of pop-culture that was semi-popular in the 80s-2002 time frame. Not just movies, but TV series, books, theatre, musicals, ... Sure, copyright should be shortened, but I don't begrudge (eg.) a one hit winner making money off their hit decades layer. Life of artist is reasonable, I think. They take a gamb…

Those remakes are exactly why it shouldn't last much longer. As those remakes aren't actually about the work itself, but about the brand recognition that work has in the public consciousness. It's just free advertisement that you don't get with an original work, which is why remakes and sequels are so popular, even if the connection to the original is little more than the title.

It's not the job of copyright to allow people to get lazy or companies profiting forever from the rights they bought. The goal should be to encourage original works and current copyright isn't very good at doing so.

Also it's not like the author would go completely penniless here. Just because everybody can make a StarWars doesn't mean there won't still be a George Lucas approved canon-StarWars. Slapping the authors name on your product to declare it the "Read Thing™" might still be worth a bit and might frankly be better than today's sequels that happen completely without any of the original creators being involved.

Re: Pirate Library Mirror: Preserving 7TB of books (that are not in Libgen)

#350

Post by shrimp_emoji » Mon, Jul 04, 2022, 1:37 PM UTC

zasdffaa wrote: post #262

einpoklum wrote: post #256

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> Should I be disallowed to commercialise it? I believe you are mis-phrasing the question. What you're actually asking is: > Should the state criminalize and punish people who make copies of my work, to facilitate my commercial activity with it? And our answer is "No". You can go ahead and engage in whatever commercial activity you like, based on open access to your work.

That's a constructive answer, so thanks, although I have to ask your view of how BSD was used by apple to build a massive fortune but without paying significantly back to the BSD community. Overheard from an IP lawyer I stood near to once - something about f/oss software being incorporated into commercial products being a big issue (for the free stuff, not the company doing the 'stealing' of it). Your view?

>BSD was used by apple to build a massive fortune but without paying significantly back to the BSD community.

Welcome to free software. :)

If you had to "pay back significantly" to use it, it would not be "free software".

It's regrettable, but it's the price of freedom. Whether that's worth it is subjective. Stallman's answer to this was the GPL. (I bet Apple wouldn't've touched BSD if it was GPL'd.) Newer, hybrid license have also emerged (like the MPL) that attempt to strike a better balance between freedom and back-contributions.