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

801–810 of 848 posts

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

#801

Post by vagrantJin »

boring_twenties wrote: post #705
wly_cdgr wrote: post #669

Earlier quoted context omitted.

[flagged]

Whatever you may think of what OP's buddies were doing, there is no way to apply any reasonable meaning of the word "stealing" to it. There is indeed plenty murky here, and it is mostly coming from you in an attempt to incorrectly use an emotionally-loaded word in order to deceive people into supporting your position.

> emotionally-loaded word in order to deceive people into supporting your position

That's an entirely colourful way of phrasing it, considering I merely just said what I thought and have experienced, nor do I think I have the capacity to deceive at such a level. That is your opinion, and I accept it.

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

#802

Post by LunaSea »

pie_flavor wrote: post #366
LunaSea wrote: post #199

Earlier quoted context omitted.

That is incorrect. Libraries regularly scan and OCR books to make them digitally accessible and searchable. I hope the likes of the Library of Congress are ready to shutdown their online services.

The law specifically gives libraries a carveout to make one copy in some cases or three copies in others, for purposes like this. It does not give them the ability to send these copies to library customers over the internet.

That is exactly what libraries do though by giving access to fully scanned books on their website.

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

#803

Post by account42 »

Y_Y wrote: post #544
pie_flavor wrote: post #370

Earlier quoted context omitted.

You do not get to break the law just because you are working around some sort of restriction. The law says what it says and the judge is correct that IA violated it.

c.f. https://ifixit.com/News/54317/section-1201-exemptions-for-20... Different laws may be in conflict, and you have to resolve it one way or the other. For example if copyright law would prevent you from repairing your device (like you need to put a coprighted image of an Xbox logo on your hard disk for it to be recognised) then your repair right may trump the distribution rights of the copyright owner.

Copyright law is also already an infringement of your right to free speech and the constitution only allows coypright and similar restrictions under very limited conditions, which can be argued are not respected by current copyright laws.

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

#804

Post by rakoo »

vesinisa wrote: post #522
rakoo wrote: post #494

Earlier quoted context omitted.

What's the point of having digital preservation if noone can read the archives ? Digital access make sense, it's the logical conclusion to what IA does

But that's not what this case was about. Throughout the trial they have been allowed to provide continued digital access to the scanned books, granted they operate like a library (each borrowed book is backed by a physical copy.) The case was launched when during the Covid-19 pandemic they removed the limitations under the veil of "National Emergency Library": https://blog.archive.org/2020/03/30/internet-archive-resp…

> So, instead of expanding everyone's access to the digital archives, they have managed to indefinitely limit it by creating a restricting legal precedent.

Let's not flip the situation upside down though: IA didn't limit anything, the publishers did. The publishers have the possibility to make this possible if they want, and they don't want to: the responsibility is entirely on them.

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

#805

Post by account42 »

smallerize wrote: post #371
stepupmakeup wrote: post #254

Earlier quoted context omitted.

For wayback machine, are those compressed, deduplicated numbers? A semi-popular domain can have millions of results on their CDX api, but with https/https duplicated and about 90% of results are error pages or pages with deliberate garbage / LFI attempts in them.

Deduplication is not trivial. Each scrape is stored in a WARC archive, so you would have to unpack several large files, dedupe, and then pack them back up again. I believe they are at least compressed within each snapshot though.

Yes, that seems to be a silly way to go about it if your goal is to store the whole web and not just a single scrape. Of course anything that deduplicates data is more vulnerable to data corruption (or at least corruption can have wider consequences) so it's not a trivial problem but you'd think deduplicating identical resources would be something added the first time they came close to their storage limits.

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

#806

Post by account42 »

EvanAnderson wrote: post #278
gdw2 wrote: post #168

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Sounds like a similar concept to Aereo ( https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Aereo ) > Aereo leased each user an individual antenna and DVR situated in a remote warehouse that they could access over the Internet, allowing subscribers to view live broadcast television and to record the broadcasts for later viewing.

For anyone who doesn't know, though, SCOTUS ruled against Aereo, who subsequently closed-up shop, filed for Chapter 11, and eventually were sold to DirectTV. You can't "clever" around the intent of the law (or around a well-funded lobby). An O'Connor v. Oakhurst Dairy[0] are the exception, not the rule. (Aside: This is nothing at all like O'Connor v. Oakhurst Dairy-- I just can't resist the urge to cite it. It's too…

> You can't "clever" around the intent of the law

Except the whole reason this case exists is that publishers think they have found a clever way around the first sale doctrine.

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

#807

Post by IshKebab »

account42 wrote: post #797
IshKebab wrote: post #742

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> But at the same time I know the courts side with publishers pretty much every time and copyright law being such as it is they're totally screwed. I mean... they did just scan a load of in-copyright books and then let anyone download them with no restrictions. What did they think was going to happen? I think you have to be particularly extreme and naive to think that would have been ok, legally or morally.

Sharing information is always morally OK. It's copyright itself that is a severe infringement to our right of free speech without a good enough reason to justify that.

So how do you propose compensating authors for their work? Or should they all do it for free?

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

#808

Post by account42 »

steeeeeve wrote: post #734

This appeal will further be appealed. There are logical contradictions within the decision. Further, the judges have come to a conclusion at the summary judgement phase that does not meet the basic criteria of looking at things in the light that best favors the defendant.

I wonder if IA intentionally made a weaker case to drag this in front of the supreme course in order to be able to set a stronger precedent?

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

#809

Post by account42 »

exitb wrote: post #438
tourmalinetaco wrote: post #398

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Piracy is realistically the only option for books that are not printed but also not in the public domain.

Big publishers don’t care for those cases, but they’d rather you don’t spend time with that and buy a fresh, new book they just printed.

Right, but there is no reason why we need to let publishers have a say in the matter.

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

#810

Post by account42 »

Aachen wrote: post #187
dpedu wrote: post #157

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I couldn't think of anything off the top of my head either, but a google search found this: https://www.theverge.com/2022/9/7/23341051/kiwi-farms-intern... Edit: HN discussion: https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=32743325

> citing an “immediate threat to human life” due to threats and potential criminal actions from Kiwi Farms users [...] Kiwi Farms is known for collecting and publicizing personal details about targets it holds in contempt, many of whom are transgender women Sounds sensible. I also wouldn't want to host such content tbh, similar to CSAM or pirated movies or so, hosting this material sounds somewhere between being a di…

Calling Kiwi Farms an "immediate threat to human life" is not even remotely close to sensible. You can justify pretty much any censorship if you allow that rhetoric.
Post reply on HN