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

Spotify won court order against Anna's Archive, taking down .org domain

arstechnica.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

151–160 of 166 posts

Re: Spotify won court order against Anna's Archive, taking down .org domain

#151

Post by selfhoster11 »

cryzinger wrote: post #49
ronsor wrote: post #3

Unfortunately for Spotify, court orders are ineffective against foreign nationals sharing information. Copyright enforcement is as futile as the encryption "export restrictions" the US and other countries tried in the 90s and early 2000s.

Yeah, but TFA notes how Anna's Archive is dependent on US-based infrastructure, including Cloudflare. As much as I love Anna's Archive, I feel like this Spotify move was a misstep on their part. The music industry seems far scarier than the publishing industry when it comes to copyright suits, which means they have a lot to lose here by poking the bear, but there are already plenty of places to find pirated music, wh…

I disagree. Music needs to be archived just as much as books and other publications. Yes, there is heat, but lots of people support them.

Re: Spotify won court order against Anna's Archive, taking down .org domain

#152

Post by NoMoreNicksLeft »

DannyBee wrote: post #138
kassner wrote: post #122

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Spotify does not own that copyright, only a distribution license. How they can get away with it?

The plaintiffs are actually record companies, spotify is tacked on at the end for some reason, and the article decided to confuse matters :)

With the amount of content that has been described, it's not unlikely that Spotify actually owns some tiny fraction of it. They probably have some half-assed record label that owns two songs by a nobody.

Re: Spotify won court order against Anna's Archive, taking down .org domain

#153

Post by solaris2007 »

DannyBee wrote: post #138
kassner wrote: post #122

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Spotify does not own that copyright, only a distribution license. How they can get away with it?

The plaintiffs are actually record companies, spotify is tacked on at the end for some reason, and the article decided to confuse matters :)

Rights can be extended through contracts. A lawyer at Spotify might think to put in: "we distribute the music for you, your right to enforce copyright or otherwise litigate on behalf of that music is also extended to us as if we also own it".

The legal language would be different, that's a dumbed down version.

Re: Spotify won court order against Anna's Archive, taking down .org domain

#154

Post by hirako2000 »

johnnyanmac wrote: post #87
hirako2000 wrote: post #77

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Law is made of people and politics touches everything. Even with separate of powers, lobbies make sure those they represent get good treatments.

I guess this is a naive question, but where are the lobbies that care about the people? Or even common decency at this point? It really feels like people are treating the US less as an investment and more like a sinking ship to abandon. And they were the ones that shot the holes to begin with.

There are plenty. The issue is funding thus even cumulatively have less impact than say, APAC.

Also "the people" have a lot of different things they individually care about, and aren't well organized around those either.

Re: Spotify won court order against Anna's Archive, taking down .org domain

#155

Post by machomaster »

PokemonNoGo wrote: post #147
machomaster wrote: post #133

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Did you know that Ars in Ars Technica stands for Ass, showing how badly they really thought of technology? /s

Sarcasm doesn't mean bad jokes.

And this is exactly why I had to use /s. Because some people would not understand that it was weitten tongue-in-cheek, while some others would fail to see the larger context and confuse my sarcasm with a simple joke (sure, as a joke it is bad; and that's precicely because it was optimized to be sarcastic, not joke-funny).

Re: Spotify won court order against Anna's Archive, taking down .org domain

#156

Post by s1artibartfast »

johnnyanmac wrote: post #92
s1artibartfast wrote: post #84

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I dont think the idea that it can be already done matters though. You just have to show harm or intent to harm, and the archive had it. Selective prosecution isn't a strong defense in civil court.

For a normal case, maybe. for a TRO, it does matter. And they got a TRO the same day they asked on Jan 2nd. That's an oddly concerning move.

I think it is pretty standard if the other party doesnt show up in court. Did they?

Re: Spotify won court order against Anna's Archive, taking down .org domain

#157

Post by bbor »

direwolf20 wrote: post #125
bbor wrote: post #108

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Legality is not morality. These laws in particular happen to not only be harmful, but also in direct opposition to the ostensible spirit of this board

This board is a discussion place for founders of YC companies that happens to also be open to the public.

That is its origin, not its nature. Shareholders do not a community make :)

Re: Spotify won court order against Anna's Archive, taking down .org domain

#158

Post by endofreach »

s1artibartfast wrote: post #86
endofreach wrote: post #4

what‘s in it for spotify? i can‘t think of a single person who‘d stop paying for streaming services (music) in favour of going back to illegally download or (or even legally purchase) songs & managing their own library. m a y b e some devs would. but those thinking about it, wouldn‘t be stopped like that. i am thinking about it, yet i just renewed my subscription because i lack time & motivation to crawl down yet ano…

I would go back in an instant. I think a lot of people would if it is convenient. Furthermore, all someone has to do is make a Spotify clone to interact with the archive and you have consumed their entire business. Even if you didnt want a DIY solution, I bet you would accept a free clone, along with every other customer

i dont think its much harder. but we got used to a different convenience standard regarding the consumption (of our music/library).

Re: Spotify won court order against Anna's Archive, taking down .org domain

#159

Post by unparagoned »

akersten wrote: post #7

But you can't even download the allegedly infringing material from the .org site. You can just read about it? So they're abusing the All Writs Act to take down a site that they think is related to some undetermined future nebulously bad thing for their business. If I wasn't on Anna's side before, I sure am now.

Look at this clever hack to get away with committing crimes and there is nothing they can do.

Oh it looks like the justice system isn’t stupid enough to fall for it. Now everyone is angry that the justice system isn’t serious and dumb.

Re: Spotify won court order against Anna's Archive, taking down .org domain

#160

Post by helsinki8 »

surround wrote: post #73
akersten wrote: post #7

But you can't even download the allegedly infringing material from the .org site. You can just read about it? So they're abusing the All Writs Act to take down a site that they think is related to some undetermined future nebulously bad thing for their business. If I wasn't on Anna's side before, I sure am now.

Anna's Archive announced they intended to infringe on the label's copyrights by distributing their music without a license. The law allows the court "to prevent or restrain infringement of a copyright" (emphasis mine). https://www.law.cornell.edu/uscode/text/17/502#:~:text=Any%2...

We need to abolish copyright laws entirely. This is just the ten millionth instance of them being abused by the 1% to harm the majority.
Post reply on HN