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

Anna's Archive Faces Millions in Damages and a Permanent Injunction

torrentfreak.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

101–110 of 212 posts

Re: Anna's Archive Faces Millions in Damages and a Permanent Injunction

#101

Post by userbinator »

ndriscoll wrote: post #55
shrubble wrote: post #32

Earlier quoted context omitted.

If you only care about non-fiction and science journals it is more like 250TB I think? Still several thousands in 22TB drives with ZFS though.

22 TB drives are around $230 on ebay, so if you used 15 of them in raidz2, that'd be around $3500 (so maybe a little over $4k with the rest of the server), which is around the cost of a new mirrorless camera and a decent lens, so certainly within the realm of a hobbyist. You probably couldn't get away with downloading 250 TB in any reasonable timeframe with most US ISPs (or at least Comcast) though. That'd be over 2.…

Tape might be a better choice with that much data.

Re: Anna's Archive Faces Millions in Damages and a Permanent Injunction

#102

Post by iczero »

xiiiixi wrote: post #66
tehwebguy wrote: post #56

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Article says nobody is responding as defendant except one individual who has filed a motion to dismiss based on being misidentified. I don’t know the status of that motion though.

[flagged]

>"high degree of probability"

what degree? what's the false positive rate? what's the false negative rate? what's the true negative rate? what other evidence have you got?

even better, why are you talking about this at all? isn't it best practice to shut up about legal cases?

Re: Anna's Archive Faces Millions in Damages and a Permanent Injunction

#103

Post by userbinator »

CamperBob2 wrote: post #95
squigz wrote: post #92

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I assumed that GP was an average person who doesn't have a storage array sitting at home. I'm not really sure why the IA is relevant here

1 PB of disk space would cost about $10K at this point in time. Not exactly unattainable. Looks like it would fit in a volume of space about the size of a standard refrigerator. I'd be OK with both requirements.

1PB is well beyond the point at which a tape drive and a bunch of tapes will be cheaper than hard drives, and likely more reliable.

Re: Anna's Archive Faces Millions in Damages and a Permanent Injunction

#104

Post by chongli »

kragen wrote: post #97
chongli wrote: post #94

Earlier quoted context omitted.

How does a company like NVIDIA operate without IP law? They are fabless. Everything they produce is digital, either in the form of software or in the form of chip designs. As far as I can tell, without protection from IP law (patents, copyrights, trade secrets) NVIDIA could not function as a company. They would have no means whatsoever at preventing a fab like TSMC from manufacturing clones of their devices and selli…

it's an interesting question, and hopefully after a few decades of repealing intellectual property laws, we can find out. 40 years ago it wasn't obvious that anything like nvidia could exist in the first place. possibilities include: - no company like nvidia could exist, and for chip design and fabrication we'd be stuck with companies like intel, digital, micron, samsung, and texas instruments; but many other kinds o…

fabs like tsmc would hire design firms like nvidia to produce designs to fabricate; the division of labor would be the same as at present, but banks and investors would send their money to tsmc to pay to nvidia, rather than to nvidia to pay to tsmc

There’s a bit of a snag with this. Chip designs are rarely ever done from scratch. Instead they’re iterated over many years, similar to how browsers, operating systems, other critical software is developed. It took NVIDIA decades to get where they are now. If anyone else can just take their designs as a starting point then NVIDIA’s whole investment (billions of dollars in R&D over decades) ceases to be a competitive advantage.

I think what would actually end up happening is that chip design as NVIDIA is doing would cease to exist as a business. Perhaps we’d end up with something more akin to an open source model like Linux. But then cost of manufacturing (paying for the masks and order startup costs) would still run into the millions, and TSMC would hold all the cards.

The reason I brought all this up though may have been missed by all the commenters to my original post: the U.S. government and their strategic interests. Having American companies like NVIDIA (and Apple as well, really) lose power and marketshare is not in the interest of the government. The last thing the US wants to see is for China to close the technology gap on this stuff.

Re: Anna's Archive Faces Millions in Damages and a Permanent Injunction

#106

Post by kragen »

chongli wrote: post #104
kragen wrote: post #97

Earlier quoted context omitted.

it's an interesting question, and hopefully after a few decades of repealing intellectual property laws, we can find out. 40 years ago it wasn't obvious that anything like nvidia could exist in the first place. possibilities include: - no company like nvidia could exist, and for chip design and fabrication we'd be stuck with companies like intel, digital, micron, samsung, and texas instruments; but many other kinds o…

fabs like tsmc would hire design firms like nvidia to produce designs to fabricate; the division of labor would be the same as at present, but banks and investors would send their money to tsmc to pay to nvidia, rather than to nvidia to pay to tsmc There’s a bit of a snag with this. Chip designs are rarely ever done from scratch. Instead they’re iterated over many years, similar to how browsers, operating systems, ot…

in the case you mention, the geopolitical considerations run strongly counter to what you suggest

chinese policymakers can loosen domestic restrictions on innovation such as copyright and patent laws; then the laws in the us will only restrict us companies like nvidia. in large part this has happened, which is a major reason chinese companies (in both prc and roc) have become the leading organizations in a wide variety of high-tech fields, including solar panels, cell phones, electric cars, nuclear power, and microelectronics

your nvidia analogy predicts that gcc engineers and linux kernel engineers would have terrible job security, since anyone who needs a gcc backend or device driver written can hire literally any programmer; there are no legal restrictions. but in fact this seems to make the barriers to entry higher rather than lower. they're just in the form of 'human capital', knowhow, rather than in the form of the assets of a company

also, you may not be aware of this, but tsmc is a chinese company, and it's already left the us behind. sentences like 'The last thing the US wants to see is for China to close the technology gap on this stuff.' reflect wishful thinking that the technology gap is the other way around from how it actually is

Re: Anna's Archive Faces Millions in Damages and a Permanent Injunction

#107

Post by freejazz »

ElevenLathe wrote: post #45
noman-land wrote: post #27

Earlier quoted context omitted.

What's a suitable replacement?

Copyright should probably grant some benefit to an author, but just the bare minimum necessary to incentivize people to actually submit their work and file for copyright (also, we should resume requiring that you actually file for copyright, as was the case before 1978). This probably means some period of exclusive monetization rights. Anyone should be able to search for and read any filed works for free from the mom…

"but just the bare minimum necessary to incentivize people to actually submit their work and file for copyright"

Oh, okay!

Re: Anna's Archive Faces Millions in Damages and a Permanent Injunction

#108

Post by freejazz »

Super_Jambo wrote: post #58
chongli wrote: post #57

Earlier quoted context omitted.

IP-intensive industries contribute 41% of the US GDP and employ 44% of the US workforce [1]. If you abolished IP all of that would go away. How would you replace that? I'm not a fan of IP either but I think it's pretty hard to escape that reality. Big companies like NVIDIA (3T market cap) are almost 100% IP. IP is more-or-less central to the US's economic and security strategy. Without it, the country loses a huge am…

Pay them from general taxation to dig holes and fill them in again with spoons? If you can only succeed because you're government is holding back others at the barrel of a gun do you really deserve to?

I hope you don't mind when I come and take your computer.

Re: Anna's Archive Faces Millions in Damages and a Permanent Injunction

#109

Post by s1artibartfast »

hug wrote: post #84
s1artibartfast wrote: post #76

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Of course I agree that there are some differences, but they are the same with respect to the sated role of government. Physical theft deprives the owner of physical property (where this right is respected by law. IP theft deprives the owner of intellectual property ( where this right is respected by law). People can and do make arguments against both IP and physical property, but the role of government the the same i…

Unlike physical property, "intellectual property" doesn't exist by itself. The thing that exists, the product that it is that you ostensibly "own" that is protected by the government is the copyright, a soft of reified extension of ownership, which only has any value inasmuch as the government protects it. In other words, intellectual property is only worth what the government says it is. It doesn't just hold the gun…

I don't think it is any different for physical property. What is a pound of gold worth when you are defenseless and someone else has armed men willing to kill you.

Might makes right and owns all property is the default. Every situation that deviates from this is imposed by governments.

A market around physical goods is no different.

Re: Anna's Archive Faces Millions in Damages and a Permanent Injunction

#110

Post by tivert »

jacobr1 wrote: post #74
wongarsu wrote: post #53

Earlier quoted context omitted.

A copyright term of 30 years after first publication, or 30 years after creation if no publication happens in this period. Ideally add some provision that ensures works are actually available after that period (similar to how many countries require all printed books to be submitted to the national library, but extend it to all media that achieves some benchmark of significance). Patent duration adjusted on a per-indu…

The best model I've seen for patents is increasingly escalating renewal fees for periodic terms. Such as get the first 5 years for very limited fees, every 5 years (up to some max such as 30) require 2-5x to renew or the patent expires. The exponentially increasing fees limit the hoarding of patents without direct economic benefits, but the high cost means you are able to provide offsetting social benefits while stil…

> The best model I've seen for patents is increasingly escalating renewal fees for periodic terms. Such as get the first 5 years for very limited fees, every 5 years (up to some max such as 30) require 2-5x to renew or the patent expires. The exponentially increasing fees limit the hoarding of patents without direct economic benefits, but the high cost means you are able to provide offsetting social benefits while still providing incentives for innovation.

So, basically, long-term patents should be a privilege reserved for the rich (people and corporations). Everyone else should GTFO? I'm sure FAANG would still be totally able to massively horde patents with whatever fee structure you propose.

FFS, Amazon developed literally dozens of commercial properties in my area, and then let them sit vacant for literal years because they had some change in strategy. They're perfectly happy to burn money, since they have so much.

So, your idea doesn't solve the problem you're trying to solve, and it would make things worse besides.

Post reply on HN