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

561–570 of 848 posts

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

#561

Post by leobg »

zelphirkalt wrote: post #491
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.

How about we feed an "AI" with it, like MS does with licensed code? Then we can host that AI and let people use that, without having it output where some text is from, just like MS does for code.

Right. Just let OpenAI do it. Then it’s allowed. And internally, let the “model” be a 7zip compression algo. Just call it an “LLM”. Courts won’t know the difference. Haha

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

#562

Post by pbhjpbhj »

rodgerd wrote: post #405
cmiles74 wrote: post #148

Earlier quoted context omitted.

How was the CDL hurting working authors? A library bought the book, paying the publisher and the author. The IA scanned the book for digital lending, this digital copy could only be checked out by one person and only when the physical book was not also checked out. I understand the court decided this wasn't okay. That aside, how was it hurting working authors?

I was looking for a clip from a trailer for a film that is available on physical media, streaming, and was in cinemas two years ago. IA had the whole film online as bluray quality rip. What's the difference between the IA and Kim Dotcom at that point?

You'll also have to ask what's the difference between Google Drive (or any other online file store) and IA here though. I've found plenty of complete copyright works on Google Drive.

Do IA respond to removal requests? Did IA staff upload that film?

For that, Google Books took works still in copyright and made copies for commercial purposes, they somehow were allowed.

The difference with Kim Dotcom is possibly that he sold (!) more movies through his activities.

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

#563

Post by pbhjpbhj »

71bw wrote: post #488
rodgerd wrote: post #405

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I was looking for a clip from a trailer for a film that is available on physical media, streaming, and was in cinemas two years ago. IA had the whole film online as bluray quality rip. What's the difference between the IA and Kim Dotcom at that point?

>What's the difference between the IA and Kim Dotcom at that point? None. They have, for a long time now, become a good place for outright piracy - both for downloaders and uploaders. It's nice to have such easy access to perfect DVDrips of GTA: SA v1.0 US, but... definitely NOT legal.

It's legal to download if you own a copy isn't it? In USA, I mean?

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

#564

Post by hilbert42 »

Y_Y wrote: post #534
hilbert42 wrote: post #457

Earlier quoted context omitted.

"US …copyright with gunboats." Right, that's why it will get worse. Unfortunately, we're still only in skirmish territory. And it's a battle we have to win.

I think about time for a third opium war. China is manipulating currency through trade restrictions, and the West wants to sell them poison, maybe it's time to sail a carrier group up the Pearl River!

The battle that needs to be won is with greedy publishers who don't respect either creators or content consumers.

The copyright/patents issue with China is only part of a much bigger political issue. Gunboat diplomacy isn't the solution, history has shown it's made things worse—China hasn't forgotten the Opium Wars.

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

#565

Post by kuon »

tokai wrote: post #553
kuon wrote: post #540

Is there torrent of those books we can distribute?

That the dumbest thing about this. All these books are available at Library Genesis or Anna's Archive. There was no reason for IA to distribute illegally when others where doing it with much less risk. Way to risk your main mission with no up side.

I agree. Maybe they should split into separate judiciary entities?

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

#566

Post by AbrahamParangi »

el_jay wrote: post #546

Am I to understand that it’s legal and okay for LLM providers to profit massively from training commercial models on copyrighted works, without the rights holders’ permission - but illegal, and unacceptable, for private individuals to access a digital library?

Yes, quite straightforwardly. Works may be copyrighted, but all the ideas and stylistic choices which comprise that work generally may not.

That the implications of this idea have the “wrong” winners and losers is a separate matter.

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

#568

Post by hilbert42 »

leobg wrote: post #561
zelphirkalt wrote: post #491

Earlier quoted context omitted.

How about we feed an "AI" with it, like MS does with licensed code? Then we can host that AI and let people use that, without having it output where some text is from, just like MS does for code.

Right. Just let OpenAI do it. Then it’s allowed. And internally, let the “model” be a 7zip compression algo. Just call it an “LLM”. Courts won’t know the difference. Haha

"Courts won’t know the difference."

Whether or not I'd suggest that if AI makes reverse-engineering easy (and I see no reason why it won't) then users will use it on an individual basis. Detecting the myriads of breaches would be a nightmare for any law/courts system. Ultimately, the paradigm will have to change.

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

#569

Post by michaelt »

protocolture wrote: post #464
mardifoufs wrote: post #289

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Except that IA is a non profit with a specific set of goals. Not only that but by the very nature of said goals (amongst others, preservation and archival of knowledge), they have to be even more prudent and have stability as one of their most important goals imo. Like, every goal they have becomes completely impossible to achieve without a very stable, long term outlook. "Hitting and missing" is usually fine, but it…

The Internet Archive should probably have, granting access to the data in the archive, as a core goal and calling that activism is bizarre to me.

I don't think it's quite that simple.

I can't just scrape nytimes.com and re-host it on my own website legally - that's clear copyright infringement. Google news quoting article excerpts was legally controversial, as was their book search function, and their archive option.

I always assumed website owners were just sorta turning a blind eye to archive.org because (a) it's slow and (b) it doesn't get indexed in google

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

#570

Post by zelphirkalt »

hilbert42 wrote: post #568
leobg wrote: post #561

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Right. Just let OpenAI do it. Then it’s allowed. And internally, let the “model” be a 7zip compression algo. Just call it an “LLM”. Courts won’t know the difference. Haha

"Courts won’t know the difference." Whether or not I'd suggest that if AI makes reverse-engineering easy (and I see no reason why it won't) then users will use it on an individual basis. Detecting the myriads of breaches would be a nightmare for any law/courts system. Ultimately, the paradigm will have to change.

We could also abolish copyrights for software in general and for everyone, including the tech giants.
Post reply on HN