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

Judge decides against Internet Archive

file770.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

491–500 of 835 posts

Re: Judge decides against Internet Archive

#491

Post by Mindwipe »

crazygringo wrote: post #247
allturtles wrote: post #210

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Yes, IA has followed a similar tragic arc as Google Books, another martyr to the dream of a truly 21st century library. What's most tragic about it to me is that that vast majority of works affected are "zombie" copyright works that have no actual commercial value. Someone, somewhere holds the copyright, but no one has sold a copy in years or decades. For the sake of protecting the tiny sliver of commercially valuabl…

Seriously. Has there been any kind of movement towards a law that would automatically put zombie works into the public domain? It really doesn't seem unreasonable that if a book, film, recording, or video game hasn't been generally available for sale over the past 5 or 10 years it becomes public domain. Use it or lose it, in other words. Although it might really only apply to past works. Because while physical books…

Not in the public domain, no, but some countries such as the Nordics have mandatory schemes for orphan works where a collection society is able to authorise their use and has legal protection to do so, and will pay out said royalties should someone come forward to claim ownership at a later date.

Most of Europe was going to do this at some point but the photographer's unions pushed back in very strong terms so they were often watered down.

Re: Judge decides against Internet Archive

#492

Post by Mindwipe »

crazygringo wrote: post #247
allturtles wrote: post #210

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Yes, IA has followed a similar tragic arc as Google Books, another martyr to the dream of a truly 21st century library. What's most tragic about it to me is that that vast majority of works affected are "zombie" copyright works that have no actual commercial value. Someone, somewhere holds the copyright, but no one has sold a copy in years or decades. For the sake of protecting the tiny sliver of commercially valuabl…

Seriously. Has there been any kind of movement towards a law that would automatically put zombie works into the public domain? It really doesn't seem unreasonable that if a book, film, recording, or video game hasn't been generally available for sale over the past 5 or 10 years it becomes public domain. Use it or lose it, in other words. Although it might really only apply to past works. Because while physical books…

Not in the public domain, no, but some countries such as the Nordics have mandatory schemes for orphan works where a collection society is able to authorise their use and has legal protection to do so, and will pay out said royalties should someone come forward to claim ownership at a later date.

Most of Europe was going to do this at some point but the photographer's unions pushed back in very strong terms so they were often watered down.

Re: Judge decides against Internet Archive

#493

Post by boomboomsubban »

DoingIsLearning wrote: post #371

But I can borrow ebooks from other public libraries. Is there something specific about IA or is this ruling making the concept of epub borrowing a copyright infringement (in the US)?

This ruling says controlled digital lending is copyright infringement. Some other libraries use controlled digital lending, but most use a different system.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Controlled_digital_lending

Re: Judge decides against Internet Archive

#495

Post by colonwqbang »

politelemon wrote: post #461
uda wrote: post #408

Initially I'm enraged against the publishers, the judge and the system in general as many of you, but they are not the issue, while I can't talk on behalf of IA, I don't see this as a fight against the publishers, but a fight against broken business models flourishing because and protected by broken laws meant to protect earlier broken business models The current law is broken, we know that, but most of us don't gras…

> and then we expect the judge to "save" us from the broken law instead of holding the legislators accountable Why can't it be both? All this does is keep us busy looking where the 'root cause' is and never actually solve anything because the mechanisms to fix those things don't exist... all the while others reap its benefits.

A system where judges ignore the law and just rule based on their general gut feeling, is much worse.

Re: Judge decides against Internet Archive

#496

Post by zarzavat »

friend_and_foe wrote: post #420
icelancer wrote: post #261

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Because people are not good at using the Internet or technology and just want to click on links.

I'm not convinced. Before smartphones and the like, people used Gnutella and ICQ. We live in a world of telephone numbers, social security numbers, credit card numbers, top level domains, maybe your average Joe can't program a computer but he can definitely install Tor browser and a BitTorrent client. I think the problem is that the produce the end user gets are delivered as a business case through a funnel, and peop…

In the 2000s, using P2P was very common because the alternative was ripping CDs or spending $$$ on the iTunes Store for DRMed music. People were also not connected all the time so it made sense to download and store your music on an iPod or similar.

In the late 2000s Spotify arrived, it was much easier than piracy, and not as expensive as the iTunes Store, although still DRMed.

At the same time, Apple introduced the iPhone and people gradually stopped using computers so much and started using smartphones more. And on smartphones you couldn’t install whatever software you wanted.

Many younger people today in the west have no experience of piracy at all. They live on their phones in a fully corporatized environment.

Re: Judge decides against Internet Archive

#497

Post by frankfrankfrank »

Here comes the memory hole, folks. This copyright claim is just the ruse to break down the wall, with the real purpose being to lay claim to news and internet archiving so that inconvenient news and information can be more easily memory holed without archives existing.

Let me put it this way, everyone should start working on decentralized archiving tools and retention of information locally about topics they are particularly interested in. I don’t say that out of the blue.

Re: Judge decides against Internet Archive

#498

Post by goodlinks »

FredPret wrote: post #486
goodlinks wrote: post #450

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Human rights and democracy are nothing like IP. Dont be shitty to people and listen to their voice are thing that any group of children playing may come up with them selves. Those same children will copy each other and build on ideas each other have. Thi child who demands no one can play a game or any derivative because they came up with it first, well, they are just not very nice.

Ironically, if we built a lord-of-the-flies society (based on child "morality") we'll have an arbitrary concentration of power that'll make our IP rules look like a picnic.

Seems you are arguing a against something i didnt say?

I guess you must believe you have some special ideas that you didnt get from anyone else at all, not based on any of you experiences and conversations with others that we all should pay you to use or refine (or even just repeat). And that you think it right to force these kinds of delusions on your children to stop them growing up stupid and naive?

Re: Judge decides against Internet Archive

#500

Post by endisneigh »

wilsonnb3 wrote: post #299
endisneigh wrote: post #260

Earlier quoted context omitted.

You could say the same about stealing physical books.

How many times must we have the discussion about the differences between stealing a physical item and copying a digital one?

It’s not the same, but the OP is talking about free access to information. So under that logic stealing the physical book is fine. Or I can amend my original comment and say stealing the physical book, creating a copy using a commodity printer and leaving the copy, while keeping the original, is fine.
Post reply on HN