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

551–560 of 835 posts

Re: Judge decides against Internet Archive

#551

Post by pbhjpbhj »

Dylan16807 wrote: post #547
bruce511 wrote: post #383

Earlier quoted context omitted.

"patent trolls" is an unhelpful term because it is in the eye of the beholder. Was Amazon being a patent troll patenting single-click-to-purchase? Was Apple a troll in patenting Swipe to Unlock? They were using those patents in their products. On the other hand is the Tolkien Estate patent trolls? They're not producing anything new.) If I have a dozen patents, and some company wants to buy them from me, is that any d…

> The root of copyright issues are (mostly) not about actual copyright, but the length of copyright. The other issues are getting worse over time. Lack of first sale doctrine. DRM preventing fair use. That Aereo thing where you're not allowed to rent a preconfigured antenna and recorder from someone else.

Yes, very few works need more than the original 7 years in order for them to get a sufficient return to make them economically viable.

Re: Judge decides against Internet Archive

#552

Post by narwally »

berniedurfee wrote: post #539
cat_plus_plus wrote: post #285

Intellectual property is an unnatural, made up construct that will one day be seen as ridiculous as absolute monarchy is today. If we are going to allow it and penalize people who are doing natural human things like sharing with friends, there has to be a specific benefit to society in every instance. For example, pay taxes on copyrights and patents, increasing every year to reflect disturbance caused to society.

But doesn’t that conflict with the practicalities of economics? If everyone freely creates copies of what I produce, because they can, I can’t go buy things that can’t be easily replicated, like food or shelter. If IP is free for everyone, what do we do with all the people who need to live solely by producing IP?

Do we actually need monetary incentives to get people to create new things. Won't people naturally keep creating new things as long as they aren't constrained by a more fundamental need? So we really just need to create a society where nobody has to worry about their basic needs like housing, food, healthcare, etc...and then people are free to create and are even free to fail while doing so.

Re: Judge decides against Internet Archive

#553

Post by [deleted] »

tenpies wrote: post #229
A4ET8a8uTh0 wrote: post #184

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I said it before on this very forum. Wikipedia does not really need your donations these days. IA just might.

Unfortunately IA lost all credibility in my eyes, when they decided that one journalist in particular gets to decide that none of their (awful) tweets should be archived[1]. I understand not allowing certain things to be archived, but the tweets of a public person, especially one who works as a news-maker, should certainly be in the allowed list. E: And just to be clear, this was before said writer set their tweets t…

[deleted]

Re: Judge decides against Internet Archive

#554

Post by pbhjpbhj »

vasco wrote: post #376
numpad0 wrote: post #350

Earlier quoted context omitted.

It’s kind of true that idea of IP is entirely made-up, but it’s also important to recognize that it was made up to support and safeguard author’s living . IP allows authors to require values of content to be preserved, recognized, and financially rewarded(in one-time or recurring payments). In the absence of IP, printing companies can take manuscripts and contents to profit off of copies free-for-all style, bankrupti…

It was created to allow the United States to make money printing books without paying for them but not allowing other countries to print their books. Later it was expanded to keep poor countries and people from affording medicine. All enforced by threat of economic sanctions with the full backing of the US armed forces. Reading on the history of copyright would be a good start before perpetuating misconceptions.

How does that story fit with USA being 100 years later to the Paris Convention?

Re: Judge decides against Internet Archive

#555

Post by narwally »

atomicUpdate wrote: post #358
panic wrote: post #332

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Are there any organizations working toward the abolition of intellectual property in the US? I agree with you that it's ridiculous and would love to do something about it.

Assuming such an organization existed, what would stop someone from using their name, logo, etc. to also promote enhancing IP law and undermine they’re entire message? Presumably they wouldn’t be so hypocritical as to sue you for that, would they?

Trademark and copywright aren't quite the samee things. We can get rid of copywright while still allowing trademarks.

Re: Judge decides against Internet Archive

#556

Post by denton-scratch »

komali2 wrote: post #438
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…

What actions can Americans possibly take given the captured two party system and drawing back of voting rights? Not to mention the wildly unrepresentative government, wherein for example more people can vote for Trump in California than Texas in 2020 yet each of those person's votes are functionally meaningless, or, republicans can fail for over two decades to win a popular vote and still elect three presidents in th…

> yet each of those person's votes are functionally meaningless

Not sure what a "functionally meaningless vote" is; is that simply a vote cast for the losing side? If something is to be decided by a vote, then one side of the argument is going to lose, otherwise you don't need a vote.

Re: Judge decides against Internet Archive

#557

Post by Dylan16807 »

chaboud wrote: post #270
pdar4123 wrote: post #205

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Why do u need a blockchain? Why not just torrents for sharing.

I personally don't think it's necessary, but the Blockchain creates an effectively irreversible collectivization of the work: Removal would also undo whatever other work was committed. It's kind of like cryptographically amortized hostage taking... Erase my book, and the pickle ball championships NFT gets it...

It's super easy to remove a block or a part of a block if you don't care about it.

And if you're not accepting payments there's especially little reason for you to need to care.

Re: Judge decides against Internet Archive

#558

Post by yucky »

encomiast wrote: post #313
agalunar wrote: post #308

Earlier quoted context omitted.

If I have a physical object, you can't also have that physical object. That's natural in the sense that it follows from natural law (physics). If I have an idea, or a digital copy of something, you can also use that idea, or also get a digital copy, without depriving me of it. The only reason you can't use my idea or own a digital copy is because society decided that it would punish you for doing so – and that's unna…

Sure, and also I am bigger and stronger than you. Therefore I take your physical object and you can't stop me. That's natural in the sense that it follows from natural law (physics). Natural laws are brutish and don't support the kind of society that most of us want to live in.

Except in that instance you would be depriving him of that thing. Making a digital copy of what he has would no more deprive him of that thing than taking a picture of his painting on the wall.

Re: Judge decides against Internet Archive

#559

Post by theduder99 »

b800h wrote: post #425
Timwi wrote: post #411

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The employees toil to create amazing stuff and receive a pittance compared to what it's worth. Most of the profit goes to execs who have had no hand in creating anything of value.

[flagged]

Yeah its an age/experience thing.

Re: Judge decides against Internet Archive

#560

Post by Dylan16807 »

pbhjpbhj wrote: post #551
Dylan16807 wrote: post #547

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> The root of copyright issues are (mostly) not about actual copyright, but the length of copyright. The other issues are getting worse over time. Lack of first sale doctrine. DRM preventing fair use. That Aereo thing where you're not allowed to rent a preconfigured antenna and recorder from someone else.

Yes, very few works need more than the original 7 years in order for them to get a sufficient return to make them economically viable.

When/where was it 7?
Post reply on HN