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

The Internet Archive has lost its appeal in Hachette vs. Internet Archive

storage.courtlistener.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

81–90 of 848 posts

Re: The Internet Archive has lost its appeal in Hachette vs. Internet Archive

#81

Post by Aachen »

airhangerf15 wrote: post #16

Honestly the dumbest possible move by Internet Archive. IA has gotten more and more ideological as well, and it's been censoring content it doesn't like. I'm not sure if they're in the Wikipedia/Mozilla boat of screwed up political spending, but if they are, this decision should at least temper that down. I'm sure they'll be able to raise the money needed to pay off this lawsuit. It's true the Archive has a lot of am…

What content censoring have they been doing, what could I search on to read more about it? When typing "internet archive censoring" into DDG, it just comes up with articles about this case that never even mention the word censoring

Re: The Internet Archive has lost its appeal in Hachette vs. Internet Archive

#82

Post by zerocrates »

jrochkind1 wrote: post #66
ilamont wrote: post #52

This has been playing out for many years. And it's all because Brewster Kahle decided that an overly broad interpretation of the Internet Archive's mission trumped the rights of authors and publishers, and the laws of the United States. When IA was asked to stop CDL - many times - he continued. The National Writers Union tried to open a dialogue as early as 2010 but was ignored: The Internet Archive says it would rat…

So, this case was not about CDL (Controlled Digital Lending). It was about DL with the "C" removed. Specifically the IA's previous CDL program only lent out one electronic copy at a time per physical copy held, and this case is about a program at beginning of pandemic where they suspended these limits. There could still be appeals in store for this case, but regardless of the outcome of this case, CDL could still be…

They lost here on both regular CDL and the National Emergency Library "uncontrolled" variant.

The court's decision and conclusion is almost entirely about just regular CDL:

"This appeal presents the following question: is it “fair use” for a nonprofit organization to scan copyright-protected print books in their entirety and distribute those digital copies online, in full, for free, subject to a one-to-one owned-to-loaned ratio between its print copies and the digital copies it makes available at any given time, all without authorization from the copyright-holding publishers or authors? Applying the relevant provisions of the Copyright Act as well as binding Supreme Court and Second Circuit precedent, we conclude the answer is no."

(emphasis added)

Re: The Internet Archive has lost its appeal in Hachette vs. Internet Archive

#83

Post by jrochkind1 »

zerocrates wrote: post #82
jrochkind1 wrote: post #66

Earlier quoted context omitted.

So, this case was not about CDL (Controlled Digital Lending). It was about DL with the "C" removed. Specifically the IA's previous CDL program only lent out one electronic copy at a time per physical copy held, and this case is about a program at beginning of pandemic where they suspended these limits. There could still be appeals in store for this case, but regardless of the outcome of this case, CDL could still be…

They lost here on both regular CDL and the National Emergency Library "uncontrolled" variant. The court's decision and conclusion is almost entirely about just regular CDL: "This appeal presents the following question: is it “fair use” for a nonprofit organization to scan copyright-protected print books in their entirety and distribute those digital copies online, in full, for free, subject to a one-to-one owned-to-l…

Well, that is a disaster. I'll have to read more, I hadn't realized that.

Re: The Internet Archive has lost its appeal in Hachette vs. Internet Archive

#84

Post by [deleted] »

jrochkind1 wrote: post #66
ilamont wrote: post #52

This has been playing out for many years. And it's all because Brewster Kahle decided that an overly broad interpretation of the Internet Archive's mission trumped the rights of authors and publishers, and the laws of the United States. When IA was asked to stop CDL - many times - he continued. The National Writers Union tried to open a dialogue as early as 2010 but was ignored: The Internet Archive says it would rat…

So, this case was not about CDL (Controlled Digital Lending). It was about DL with the "C" removed. Specifically the IA's previous CDL program only lent out one electronic copy at a time per physical copy held, and this case is about a program at beginning of pandemic where they suspended these limits. There could still be appeals in store for this case, but regardless of the outcome of this case, CDL could still be…

[deleted]

Re: The Internet Archive has lost its appeal in Hachette vs. Internet Archive

#85

Post by mdp2021 »

leotravis10 wrote: post #21
skyyler wrote: post #9

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Can you imagine, if public libraries weren't already a thing, convincing some Americans to build one in 2024?

Nope. Surely the copyright holders won't allow a library to be created today.

Once upon a time (when libraries were born), the community (actually the State) ruled over the lobbies.

Re: The Internet Archive has lost its appeal in Hachette vs. Internet Archive

#86

Post by tptacek »

Devasta wrote: post #4

Awful news. Seems like this is the publishers planned approach going forward, nonstop lawsuits to henpeck the IA to death.

I don't think this took much henpecking. IA basically didn't have a case, took it to federal court, appealed it, and won themselves the following 2nd Circuit precedent:

"[I]s it “fair use” for a nonprofit organization to scan copyright-protected print books in their entirety and distribute those digital copies online, in full, for free, subject to a one-to-one owned-to-loaned ratio between its print copies and the digital copies it makes available at any given time, all without authorization from the copyright-holding publishers or authors? Applying the relevant provisions of the Copyright Act as well as binding Supreme Court and Second Circuit precedent, we conclude the answer is no"

This may be a broad setback to all controlled digital lending. As the saying goes, "play stupid games...".

Re: The Internet Archive has lost its appeal in Hachette vs. Internet Archive

#87

Post by criddell »

majorchord wrote: post #20
uxp100 wrote: post #18

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I thought the person you were responding too was saying that isn’t what physical libraries do. Also, as far as I know that isn’t what physical libraries do. They buy licenses to share e-books. And don’t physically scan anything.

I meant that digitally lending the books out that IA owns 1-to-1 in the same way a real library lends out physical books should legally be treated the same, regardless of any ebook-specific licensing.

As I understand it, as soon as the IA makes the digital copy they want to lend (digitally or physically), they now have two copies of the book and have committed copyright infringement. As soon as they lend a copy, there are now three copies in existence (unless they delete their copy as part of the loan) which is another count of infringement.

Re: The Internet Archive has lost its appeal in Hachette vs. Internet Archive

#88

Post by tcgv »

tptacek wrote: post #77
hiatus wrote: post #62

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> In the Internet Archive case, they're distributing whole, unmodified copies of copyrighted works which will of course compete with those original works. Libraries would be illegal if conceived of today. If this weren't digital it would be a violation of first sale doctrine.

How? Libraries lend out actual physical objects. They're not xeroxing the books and handing them out.

Exactly. And if a book is in high demand in a library, you'd either have to wait your turn or purchase one yourself to avoid the lending queue.

Re: The Internet Archive has lost its appeal in Hachette vs. Internet Archive

#90

Post by mdp2021 »

Ekaros wrote: post #67

Whole thing should be obvious if you tried something else too. Like say DVD movies, rip them on free service and then only stream 1 copy at time... Surely that should be allowed as well? Why not music too, go out buy cds or vinyls, rip single one and now however many bulk copies you have you can stream at one time? Software gets bit more messy as it needs to be installed, but why not share saas seats, just somehow en…

It is not clear if this user knows about mediatheques.
Post reply on HN