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

191–200 of 290 posts

Re: Record labels hit Internet Archive with new copyright lawsuit

#191

Post by IndySun »

mixmastamyk wrote: post #169
lotsoweiners wrote: post #162

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Because normal people don’t care about “human cultural output” or “societal value” and think people who use those kinds of terms sound like blowhards. The rest of us just want reasonably cheap, convenient entertainment. Artists and others in the music biz want to get paid. Nothing here that is very hard to understand.

Normal people do like free stuff it turns out. And typically not going to pay when it's ancient anyway. Instead of going without, they could give it a try. They'd like that too—if they knew it was possible and even encouraged.

Can you please add a link to your free art, movie, album, musical, and/or poem. Or do you only supply links to other peoples said art?

Re: Record labels hit Internet Archive with new copyright lawsuit

#192

Post by IndySun »

nukeman wrote: post #166
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…

It’s 70 years after the death of the author. So if Andy Weir died tomorrow, The Martian wouldn’t enter the public domain until 2093.

"...70 years.."

That rule does not apply globally. Depends on where you live.

Re: Record labels hit Internet Archive with new copyright lawsuit

#193

Post by sethhochberg »

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…

I do wonder how much the influence of the distributors has helped the streaming music world avoid the problems of the streaming movie/TV providers, where content rights are usually exclusive and it’s almost impossible to be an indie service

The blessing of the way the music side is set up is that if you want to be an indie streaming music company, you can, you just need to contract with a critical mass of the big distribution houses and royalty reporting agencies and you’ll be able to play pretty much anything your customers might want to hear. If that didn’t exist, nobody would bother uploading their music to anyone but the giant incumbents like Spotify and Apple

Re: Record labels hit Internet Archive with new copyright lawsuit

#194

Post by pyuser583 »

isykt wrote: post #178

If IA is dismantled, and doesn’t manage to survive on its Canadian or other outposts, historians will look back on its destruction with disdain. Cultural heritage destroyed so corporate stooges can afford another yacht or whatever. The only way to fight this is to pirate the fuck out of everything. Seriously. Fuck DRM, fuck gatekeepers, free information NOW and ALWAYS.

Historians are very, very used to siloed and proprietary knowledge.

Re: Record labels hit Internet Archive with new copyright lawsuit

#195

Post by tux3 »

IndySun wrote: post #191
mixmastamyk wrote: post #169

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Normal people do like free stuff it turns out. And typically not going to pay when it's ancient anyway. Instead of going without, they could give it a try. They'd like that too—if they knew it was possible and even encouraged.

Can you please add a link to your free art, movie, album, musical, and/or poem. Or do you only supply links to other peoples said art?

Some people like creating enough that they'll even do it for free, as a hobby, sometimes in addition to doing in professionally and getting paid good money for it. Sometimes it's drawings, sometimes it's music, sometimes it's software on www.github.com.

But I'm not sure the point of asking people to link their own free work in context, how would that change the discussion? Is the proposal to gatekeep who can access the Internet Archive and share links to other people's art on whether they're enough of an artist themselves?

If you think it's wrong for people to archive old art that's not sold anymore, it seems to me that should hold regardless of whether the archivist has a Devianart and a Bandcamp account of their own

Re: Record labels hit Internet Archive with new copyright lawsuit

#196

Post by IndySun »

tux3 wrote: post #195
IndySun wrote: post #191

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Can you please add a link to your free art, movie, album, musical, and/or poem. Or do you only supply links to other peoples said art?

Some people like creating enough that they'll even do it for free, as a hobby, sometimes in addition to doing in professionally and getting paid good money for it. Sometimes it's drawings, sometimes it's music, sometimes it's software on www.github.com. But I'm not sure the point of asking people to link their own free work in context, how would that change the discussion? Is the proposal to gatekeep who can access t…

"some people" like creating art for free. They presumably would be people who do not need to create art for money, ergo?

(typo)

Re: Record labels hit Internet Archive with new copyright lawsuit

#198

Post by IndySun »

cannabis_sam wrote: post #157

The ONLY reason these disgusting predators can colonize human cultural output like this is the antisocial, and tremendously stupid copyright laws enacted. It always makes me wonder why people want a tiny cartel of companies to own humanity’s music culture, and subsequently be able to bully companies like Spotify, Youtube and others into enforcing extrajudicial policies that maintain the cartel’s dominance. Like, seri…

So the answer to 'disgusting predators' is to declare all 'art' (ludicrous distinction, why not everything, and why art?) free? Why not go after the 'disgusting predators' instead?

Re: Record labels hit Internet Archive with new copyright lawsuit

#199

Post by qingcharles »

jazzyjackson wrote: post #186
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/

Thank you!

Re: Record labels hit Internet Archive with new copyright lawsuit

#200

Post by tux3 »

IndySun wrote: post #196
tux3 wrote: post #195

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Some people like creating enough that they'll even do it for free, as a hobby, sometimes in addition to doing in professionally and getting paid good money for it. Sometimes it's drawings, sometimes it's music, sometimes it's software on www.github.com. But I'm not sure the point of asking people to link their own free work in context, how would that change the discussion? Is the proposal to gatekeep who can access t…

"some people" like creating art for free. They presumably would be people who do not need to create art for money, ergo? (typo)

I'm not really sure I understand why I should suppose that. I've seen people in every category, who started with a passion and did or did not turn it into a job, and did or did find the time to keep making art for the love of it

You can do art for money or not, I just don't see how you're trying to relate this to archival of music that is no longer sold, whose authors aren't around anymore. I get the impression you're trying to ask people who archive art whether they make art themselves, but I fail to see the point. Very possibly they do, but then so what?

Post reply on HN