Judge decides against Internet Archive
file770.com
Judge decides against Internet Archive
1–10 of 835 posts
Re: Judge decides against Internet Archive
#2I think most people here saw this coming. Unfortunately this isn't a question of whether the law is good, it's a question of whether IA broke the current laws we have.
IA can and should lobby for copyright law to change. But breaking it before it has changed is risky and foolish, and does more harm than good.
Re: Judge decides against Internet Archive
#3Here was the EFF's statement on the case when they initially agreed to represent the Internet Archive: https://www.eff.org/cases/hachette-v-internet-archive
IIRC this all came about because the IA decided to increase their lending beyond the limits of the licenses they had during covid, when more people were trying to use their services due to being stuck inside.
Also of note is that the is only the district court. We'll have to see if the EFF appeals to the circuit next.
Re: Judge decides against Internet Archive
#4I think most people here saw this coming. Unfortunately this isn't a question of whether the law is good, it's a question of whether IA broke the current laws we have. IA can and should lobby for copyright law to change. But breaking it before it has changed is risky and foolish, and does more harm than good.
Yeah I have to agree copying entire works and lending them out is probably not the best idea. I wonder how Google got away with the same though.
Re: Judge decides against Internet Archive
#5This sucks, big time.
Re: Judge decides against Internet Archive
#6Didn't google do almost exactly this with google books - making agreements with libraries and digitising their collections without paying the publishers or the authors? Maybe I misunderstood.
Re: Judge decides against Internet Archive
#7I think most people here saw this coming. Unfortunately this isn't a question of whether the law is good, it's a question of whether IA broke the current laws we have. IA can and should lobby for copyright law to change. But breaking it before it has changed is risky and foolish, and does more harm than good.
The system shouldn't require lobbying to get results that benefit the greater good
Re: Judge decides against Internet Archive
#8Didn't google do almost exactly this with google books - making agreements with libraries and digitising their collections without paying the publishers or the authors? Maybe I misunderstood.
They didnt offer the full books afaik.
Re: Judge decides against Internet Archive
#9Wow, reading the article this seems like a clear cut case. Did IA really think they could win this?
Edit: reading other sources, it seems like the crux of the idea is they would only lend out books where they had the same number of physical copies. I can see the reasoning for that, but it seems hard for fair use to get you there.
Re: Judge decides against Internet Archive
#10Didn't google do almost exactly this with google books - making agreements with libraries and digitising their collections without paying the publishers or the authors? Maybe I misunderstood.
They didnt offer the full books afaik.
Ahh, you're right. They copied the full books, but they don't let the public view more than snippets unless they have rights to do so. That must be the 'transformative use'.