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

Record labels hit Internet Archive with new copyright lawsuit

torrentfreak.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

181–190 of 290 posts

Re: Record labels hit Internet Archive with new copyright lawsuit

#181

Post by spookie »

tokai wrote: post #168
bluelu wrote: post #145

Earlier quoted context omitted.

You are completely mistaken That fee only covers general piracy. It does not give you the right to copy copyrighted works. In fact, european copyright is much stricter than US copyright. There is no fair use and european copyright (based on the napoleon code) forbids making a copy of copyrighted works except for a few exceptions specifically mentioned in the law (eg a browser displaying a webpage, etc...).

You are also completely mistaken. Making copies for personal use is legal in the Netherlands and (many/most?) EU countries. > You are permitted to make copies of other people’s texts, music and photographs provided that they derive from a legal source. The copies must be for your own use. It is not permissible, however, to distribute or publish such copies. https://www.government.nl/topics/intellectual-property/quest…

I can account that the same is true in Portugal and Sweden

Re: Record labels hit Internet Archive with new copyright lawsuit

#182

Post by livinginfear »

I've donated multiple times to IA. I can't live without the Wayback Machine. I have a question about the Wayback Machine that someone here might know the answer to: Sometimes a website may be imaged 10 times across the years, but hasn't changed since the first time it was crawled. Is there some system in place to avoid storing the redundant, duplicate data?

Re: Record labels hit Internet Archive with new copyright lawsuit

#183

Post by defrost »

pessimizer wrote: post #119
lotsofpulp wrote: post #93

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Start on this path guaranteed to achieve the desired results in X years, especially when Australia is not a big player on the global scene.

Australia has ranked choice voting and it has not resulted in Australia making better decisions. I'd argue that in muddling the level of preference between options by overquantizing things, it biases elections towards the status quo and a complete lack of change, and motivates the two main parties to minimize (or eliminate) their differences. It can be better to pick the one you like most rather than to sort a bunch…

> If you intentionally spoil your vote, that's actually a crime in Australia

Incorrect.

Spoilt votes are legal and non criminal - spoil your own vote as much as you like.

> Albert Langer

wasn't convicted of spoiling his vote.

He advocated everybody spoil their votes, and handed out "how to not vote" flyers

He was asked not to, there was a court case, an appeal, an injunction against Langer, a deliberate violation of that injunction, an arrest for violating that injunction, a sentence, that sentence halved, a review of the law created to mess with Langer, and then that law was tossed out.

So ..

Never a crime to spoil a vote in Australia.

Briefly "illegal" to advocate others do so (during one election).

That's no longer the case.

> I think there's a reason that Australia requires that you rank all choices.

Only in the House of Representatives - where you order a small number of choices to choose a candidate to represent your local district.

https://www.aec.gov.au/Voting/How_to_Vote/Voting_HOR.htm

Senate votes (the other House) only require to rank six parties (out of a field of potentially many) OR rank 12 individuals (out of potentially many more)

https://www.aec.gov.au/Voting/How_to_Vote/Voting_Senate.htm

You really don't appear to know much about the Australian Electoral system.

Re: Record labels hit Internet Archive with new copyright lawsuit

#184

Post by hilbert42 »

hunters_laptop wrote: post #11

internet archive should move their server/business to china or russia so these greedy companies more hard to touch them

This isn't a new concept. Those of us who are old enough will remember the UK pirate radio station Radio Caroline. It was a ship in international waters broadcasting into areas that required a broadcasting license. It was so effective that it eventually changed the whole broadcasting environment: https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Radio_Caroline

I reckon there's considerable truth in what kmeisthax said in his post about the US political system, in that copyright and patent laws are so ingrained in US political class thinking that antiquated IP laws will never be reformed.

Perhaps the only practical solution is ignore the US and bypass it altogether. A ship like Radio Caroline equipped with internet servers in international waters may be the only viable way we'll ever get to achieving a fair and equitable solution to the IP mess—that is to just bypass it.

Re: Record labels hit Internet Archive with new copyright lawsuit

#185

Post by ShadowBanThis01 »

qingcharles wrote: post #174

Can anyone find anywhere on the IA where they explain the process they are using to archive these 78s? They have a brief link to Audacity if you want to do it yourself, but no-one do they explain their process for doing it themselves. Very opaque :(

I would get a 78-optimized needle for my turntable, set it for 45 RPM (since it doesn’t have 78), and capture it through a high-quality ADC. Then I’d speed it up in post. I’ve done this.

I imagine that contributors use different methods. Old record players used thorn needles (as in plant thorns). A purist might do that and record from the player’s horn with a mic.

One annoyance I encountered in capturing old mono content is the lack of a filter in the audio software I’ve used that would keep only the mono content of a stereo recording. A lot of the crackles on a mono record are in stereo, being on only one side of a groove.

Re: Record labels hit Internet Archive with new copyright lawsuit

#186

Post by jazzyjackson »

qingcharles wrote: post #174

Can anyone find anywhere on the IA where they explain the process they are using to archive these 78s? They have a brief link to Audacity if you want to do it yourself, but no-one do they explain their process for doing it themselves. Very opaque :(

https://great78.archive.org/preservation/

Re: Record labels hit Internet Archive with new copyright lawsuit

#187

Post by MrVandemar »

qingcharles wrote: post #173
j0057 wrote: post #148

> The complaint states that when the 78rpm records were converted into digital files, IA reproduced copyrighted recordings without permission. When IA copied those files to a server, that amounted to another unauthorized reproduction, and when it transferred those copies to the public, yet another. That first step, making a digital copy of a copyrighted work, is not illegal to my knowledge of at least Dutch copyright…

Copyright in music is a nightmare. I used to work in this area, setting up one of the very first legal streaming services. There are about five different rights attached to each piece of music: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Music_licensing (See also Taylor Swift re-recording all her own music)

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

For the write up on Taylor Swift's reasons for re-recording her early albums. Interesting read.

... copyright is deeply broken.

Re: Record labels hit Internet Archive with new copyright lawsuit

#188

Post by jazzyjackson »

kevinmchugh wrote: post #75
ApolloFortyNine wrote: post #13

So the internet archive is knowing distributing media still under copyright? Is this not a slam dunk win for the record labels? Sounds like the internet archive officially made recordings available for download.

They were flaunting copyright laws with books even more egregiously and lost that suit. I think the IA is a deeply important project and wish they'd stop picking these fights.

Picking these fights is part of the mission, universal access to all knowledge requires pushing boubdaries and changing the law.

Re: Record labels hit Internet Archive with new copyright lawsuit

#189

Post by IndySun »

nikanj wrote: post #52
pessimizer wrote: post #43

I like this case. It's about recordings that are 70 years old or more, the vast majority are out of print, and the rest are often precariously in print. If I'm reading correctly, the silly nature of the claim that > [...] of the 2,749 recordings listed in the complaint, all but a “small sample” are already available to stream or download from licensed online platforms so they “face no danger of being lost, forgotten,…

Oh no, not free and unlimited access to art! Anything but that!

Is this 'Art access' you refer to something you make also? Or are you only referring to 'Art' other people make? The distinction is critical.

Re: Record labels hit Internet Archive with new copyright lawsuit

#190

Post by IndySun »

redwall_hp wrote: post #139
tux3 wrote: post #132

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Think of the middlemen and distributors, they need to get paid, otherwise who will be making the music?

I like how they've even managed to shove the middleman bullshit into digital distribution, where there's practically no way to even justify it. You can't just upload music to Spotify or Apple Music or whatever as an independent artist. You need to pay rent to a distributor who is allowed to interact with the streaming service. (Some of them offer the convenient feature of administering royalties for cover songs, but…

Who are 'they'?
Post reply on HN