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

471–480 of 848 posts

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

#471

Post by the_mitsuhiko »

kragen wrote: post #445
AlbertCory wrote: post #272

If I can relate this to movies [1], it might be illuminating: Watching a movie, you normally get a "home viewing" license. That does not give you the right to show it at your business (even if you don't charge money and only 10 people come). There's also a Public Performance Rights (PPR) license, and I always had to get PPR's because Google lawyers would shut us down otherwise. PPR costs considerably more than a home…

there is no such thing as a 'home viewing license'; you don't know the basics of us copyright law, despite having negotiated public performance rights licenses. you need a license from the copyright holder (or a fair use defense) when, and only when, you are doing one of the things reserved to the copyright holder under 17 usc §106 https://www.law.cornell.edu/uscode/text/17/106 . specifically, 17 usc §106(4) is publi…

That’s an unnecessarily pedantic comment. The US copyright act gives the copyright owner exclusive rights regarding public performance and it also defines where public starts. Sure, there is no license for home viewing but that’s not really changing anything about the point that OP was making.

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

#472

Post by protocolture »

Dalewyn wrote: post #348
jrflowers wrote: post #253

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I’m getting a “no results found” response from that search. Maybe it has already been taken down?

Here ya go: https://archive.org/details/super-mario-bros.-wonder-nspe-sh... Note to dang and friends: Not condoning piracy or whatever, this is simply to prove a point that Internet Archive hosts and distributes warez with wanton abandon.

Are you telling me... that an archive has... archived something?

Calling the cops right now!

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

#473

Post by pastage »

bawolff wrote: post #423
teruakohatu wrote: post #72

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> In his many interviews with U.S. media, he portrays the court cases and legal judgements as a crusade against the Internet Archive and all librarians. It's not. It's the logical outcome of one man's seemingly fanatical conviction against the law and the people who work very hard to bring new books into being. If IA had won, IA would be hailed as a cultural hero. They hit and they missed. Claiming Brewster Kahle is…

The correct way is to change laws is to lobby your elected representitive. Blatently breaking them generally doesn't work. It can when the laws are morally repungent, but the majority of the population are never going to find copyright law repungant the same way society found, say segregation, repungent. Copyright law may suck. The IA's actions were an extremely silly way to fight it, really didn't help anybody, and…

IA helped a lot of people, what they did was right. Maybe not legal.

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

#474

Post by protocolture »

tptacek wrote: post #241
JoshTriplett wrote: post #209

Earlier quoted context omitted.

It seems like you're making a "what happened" argument in response to a "what should have happened" argument. It's possible to make an argument in favor of this being fair use, and it's possible to make an argument against fair use. The (subjective) decision here was the latter; it doesn't preclude the possibility of the former. I'm not arguing that it was a stretch to say "no"; I'm arguing that it also wasn't a stre…

I don't think you can reasonably make a "the law is not as simple as you say it is" argument and shore it up with a "the law should be different" argument. The 4 fair-use test questions: * How transformative the derived work is * How much of the work is copied * The expressive nature of the work * The impact the derivation has on the market for the original The Internet Archive: * Copied works and made them directly…

>Made them available as a substitute for publisher-provided ebooks.

Is this true? A substitute is like for like. The IA lending provided them as a lend on the proviso that a physically purchased book is available and unused.

Its like saying that a Bookstore is competing with a Library. However the Library can only satisfy a small amount of Bookstore demand, and does so as a public good. They arent the same and the lending is downstream of a sale.

I guess you could make the argument that ebooks also have crippling anti consumer licenses so both are similar. But that just leads back to "The law should be different"

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

#475

Post by protocolture »

JumpCrisscross wrote: post #329
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…

> hope the organization can survive Maybe it shouldn’t. There is value in asking if there is a better home for those projects.

Maybe a European country that gives much less shit?

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

#476

Post by Ekaros »

pie_flavor wrote: post #373
jandrese wrote: post #113

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Because when the rules for electronic delivery were being written in congress and later legislated in the courts the publishers make damn sure to close the "library loophole" and that pesky "doctrine of first sale". The public didn't really have a seat at the table so the laws were written with a heavy deference towards the interests of the publishers. There wasn't a partisan divide either, lawmakers came together to…

This is just a bunch of fnords. 'Electronic' is not a magic word that changes what copyright protects. Copies are copies and IA distributed unlicensed copies and your local library does not distribute unlicensed copies.

Or if they do they are probably such rare books or records that there is no new commercial copies available. There is preservation of old and rare books. And then there is "preservation" of still in print with large number available.

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

#477

Post by protocolture »

grecy wrote: post #455
hilbert42 wrote: post #432

Things will get worse before they're get better, but ultimately the publishers will pay dearly for this. First, the IA should move to a more favorable copyright jurisdiction to preserve the collection. Second, there's no point fighting the copyright lobby, especially so in the US. We need to build an alternative access to knowledge that bypasses the copyright/ownership of knowledge paradigm.

> the IA should move to a more favorable copyright jurisdiction Ask the team at The Pirate Bay or Kim Dotcom how that worked out for them. The US WILL pursue it's copyright laws to any country on earth.

It will to the extent that it is able.

Like for instance, Australia's project Gutenberg tends to get things a few years before the US version because of local legal differences.

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

#478

Post by [deleted] »

Dalewyn wrote: post #467
jrflowers wrote: post #355

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I’m kind of curious how this indicates “wanton abandon” Have you downloaded and checked this file to make sure that it is a playable copy of Super Mario Wonder rather than some other file labeled as such? Have you reported it, and if so how long ago?

All you have to do to find warez of all sorts is take a casual browse through their software library. Most of it is actually supplied by ordinary users unrelated to Internet Archive with little to no oversight or curation. I have no idea how effective reporting is, but I would bet it's not meaningful given the prevailing prevalence of warez. And yes, I've downloaded some of those warez and they have all worked. I wou…

[deleted]

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

#479

Post by hilbert42 »

protocolture wrote: post #477
grecy wrote: post #455

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> the IA should move to a more favorable copyright jurisdiction Ask the team at The Pirate Bay or Kim Dotcom how that worked out for them. The US WILL pursue it's copyright laws to any country on earth.

It will to the extent that it is able. Like for instance, Australia's project Gutenberg tends to get things a few years before the US version because of local legal differences.

That difference is due to the grandfathering of the old 50-year rule for existing works when the Howard Government brought in the 70-year rule.

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

#480

Post by kragen »

the_mitsuhiko wrote: post #471
kragen wrote: post #445

Earlier quoted context omitted.

there is no such thing as a 'home viewing license'; you don't know the basics of us copyright law, despite having negotiated public performance rights licenses. you need a license from the copyright holder (or a fair use defense) when, and only when, you are doing one of the things reserved to the copyright holder under 17 usc §106 https://www.law.cornell.edu/uscode/text/17/106 . specifically, 17 usc §106(4) is publi…

That’s an unnecessarily pedantic comment. The US copyright act gives the copyright owner exclusive rights regarding public performance and it also defines where public starts. Sure, there is no license for home viewing but that’s not really changing anything about the point that OP was making.

it does, because they were adducing a cause of action that doesn't exist in either statute or caselaw. nor was it asserted by the plaintiffs, because that would have gotten their case summarily dismissed. moreover, to believe that it existed, you would have to have a comprehensively incorrect understanding of the legislative and political history of us copyright law. anyone who wants to understand any of the arguments or decisions in the case needs to understand what cause of action is actually being asserted and what the possible alternatives were. reading misleading comments about imaginary legal theories the author just made up makes that more difficult
Post reply on HN