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

Aaron Swartz was prosecuted for scraping, while Meta does it without consequence

blog.curiousquail.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

381–390 of 427 posts

Re: Aaron Swartz was prosecuted for scraping, while Meta does it without consequence

#381

Post by foldr »

DANmode wrote: post #369
foldr wrote: post #368

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I don't know where people get the idea that JSTOR is one of the bad guys. It's a non-profit that scans old journal articles that would otherwise be a huge pain to access. It costs money to do that. What specifically have they done that you disapprove of?

I don’t know where you got the idea I was talking about my opinion of JSTOR.

Beats me what you're talking about, then. The literal answer to your original question is that people use SciHub and Library Genesis because they're free. But they're free because they infringe copyright. Maybe Swartz was opposed to copyright per se or maybe he was trying to make a point about free availability of journal articles associated with publicly funded research. Either way, JSTOR is the wrong target. JSTOR doesn't hold the copyright on those articles. JSTOR does actual legit work to make scientific articles easier to access – which is exactly what Swartz seemed to be in favor of.

Re: Aaron Swartz was prosecuted for scraping, while Meta does it without consequence

#382

Post by cpburns2009 »

necovek wrote: post #271
tpmoney wrote: post #219

Earlier quoted context omitted.

While this sounds good in theory, I suspect the actual result would be much worse for justice in most cases. With the corporation acting as its own legal entity, if you are wronged, you sue and obtain justice from the corporation. If instead you needed to sue each and every shareholder to obtain their share of the liabilities, you'd likely spend many more years in court as each individual owner argues why they aren't…

I think you missed the point: you can still take damages from the corporation, but if corporation cannot provide them (bankrupcy), owners are held liable for them instead. This is how non-LLC companies are treated. The instrument of Limited Liability exists to encourage business formation and risk taking for small businesses to kick off. The way large corporations and rich individuals would structure their projects i…

That would make everyone who has a 401K, IRA, mutual fund, ETF or stocks liable for every action made by the companies invested in. That would be insane.

Re: Aaron Swartz was prosecuted for scraping, while Meta does it without consequence

#383

Post by jsbisviewtiful »

milkytron wrote: post #3

The part that still bothers me so much about the US vs Swartz case is that JSTOR didn't pursue civil litigation against Aaron. It was the US government that pursued him. There was little for the government to lose in the case. In a case vs Meta, at the scale it has reached, it could have wide ranging economic implications limiting the investment in AI, which the US is absolutely not willing to pursue at this point in…

> The whole thing is incredibly sad and exposes the hypocrisy of the US court system and government as a whole.

It does, but it's not like that's new information to minority communities.

Re: Aaron Swartz was prosecuted for scraping, while Meta does it without consequence

#384

Post by necovek »

cpburns2009 wrote: post #382
necovek wrote: post #271

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I think you missed the point: you can still take damages from the corporation, but if corporation cannot provide them (bankrupcy), owners are held liable for them instead. This is how non-LLC companies are treated. The instrument of Limited Liability exists to encourage business formation and risk taking for small businesses to kick off. The way large corporations and rich individuals would structure their projects i…

That would make everyone who has a 401K, IRA, mutual fund, ETF or stocks liable for every action made by the companies invested in. That would be insane.

I am not making a judgement call, merely describing what the GP meant.

I do believe it is not as clear cut though — taking it to an extreme, imagine you directly invested in Epstein's sexual abuse business but only as minority owner. Should you be held liable or not? Now let's extend that to a pyramid scheme lending business. Or a company using child labour? When can we claim immunity and when not?

Re: Aaron Swartz was prosecuted for scraping, while Meta does it without consequence

#385

Post by DANmode »

foldr wrote: post #381
DANmode wrote: post #369

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I don’t know where you got the idea I was talking about my opinion of JSTOR.

Beats me what you're talking about, then. The literal answer to your original question is that people use SciHub and Library Genesis because they're free. But they're free because they infringe copyright. Maybe Swartz was opposed to copyright per se or maybe he was trying to make a point about free availability of journal articles associated with publicly funded research. Either way, JSTOR is the wrong target. JSTOR…

It’s free AND convenient.

Shortening path and timelines to info, innovation, further research.

That’s the end of the calculation.

The rest is just money-clutching noise.

Re: Aaron Swartz was prosecuted for scraping, while Meta does it without consequence

#386

Post by DANmode »

foldr wrote: post #381
DANmode wrote: post #369

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I don’t know where you got the idea I was talking about my opinion of JSTOR.

Beats me what you're talking about, then. The literal answer to your original question is that people use SciHub and Library Genesis because they're free. But they're free because they infringe copyright. Maybe Swartz was opposed to copyright per se or maybe he was trying to make a point about free availability of journal articles associated with publicly funded research. Either way, JSTOR is the wrong target. JSTOR…

> JSTOR does actual legit work to make scientific articles easier to access

Just link (or specifically mention) a few things they’ve done that people really appreciate.

No need to keep repeating the claim.

Re: Aaron Swartz was prosecuted for scraping, while Meta does it without consequence

#387

Post by foldr »

DANmode wrote: post #386
foldr wrote: post #381

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Beats me what you're talking about, then. The literal answer to your original question is that people use SciHub and Library Genesis because they're free. But they're free because they infringe copyright. Maybe Swartz was opposed to copyright per se or maybe he was trying to make a point about free availability of journal articles associated with publicly funded research. Either way, JSTOR is the wrong target. JSTOR…

> JSTOR does actual legit work to make scientific articles easier to access Just link (or specifically mention) a few things they’ve done that people really appreciate. No need to keep repeating the claim.

JSTOR provides digital access to print journal archives. That's useful to anyone who wants to read an old journal article without going to a physical library. I used to have to go to the library, dig out the relevant issue of Linguistic Inquiry, and photocopy it. Then in 2015, JSTOR started providing access to the entire scanned Linguistic Inquiry archive, so I could access all of those issues digitally.

I don't understand what you mean by "money-clutching noise" in your other comment. I think enabling free universal public access to historical journal articles would be a great idea. However, some public money would then need to go towards the costs of that, and some reform of copyright law might also be needed.

Re: Aaron Swartz was prosecuted for scraping, while Meta does it without consequence

#388

Post by DANmode »

foldr wrote: post #387
DANmode wrote: post #386

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> JSTOR does actual legit work to make scientific articles easier to access Just link (or specifically mention) a few things they’ve done that people really appreciate. No need to keep repeating the claim.

JSTOR provides digital access to print journal archives. That's useful to anyone who wants to read an old journal article without going to a physical library. I used to have to go to the library, dig out the relevant issue of Linguistic Inquiry , and photocopy it. Then in 2015, JSTOR started providing access to the entire scanned Linguistic Inquiry archive, so I could access all of those issues digitally. I don't und…

Public money does go to the costs of that.

That’s where most of the PDFs come from.

Re: Aaron Swartz was prosecuted for scraping, while Meta does it without consequence

#389

Post by foldr »

DANmode wrote: post #388
foldr wrote: post #387

Earlier quoted context omitted.

JSTOR provides digital access to print journal archives. That's useful to anyone who wants to read an old journal article without going to a physical library. I used to have to go to the library, dig out the relevant issue of Linguistic Inquiry , and photocopy it. Then in 2015, JSTOR started providing access to the entire scanned Linguistic Inquiry archive, so I could access all of those issues digitally. I don't und…

Public money does go to the costs of that. That’s where most of the PDFs come from.

Hmm, no. In the case of old print journal archives scanned by JSTOR, it's JSTOR paying the cost of the scanning.

Re: Aaron Swartz was prosecuted for scraping, while Meta does it without consequence

#390

Post by pocksuppet »

deaux wrote: post #272
salawat wrote: post #143

Earlier quoted context omitted.

You just created a large, TBTF corp's veto. Pass a law or have a law passed a corp TBTF doesn't want? Break it and force the Government's hand to strike it down.

TBTF is not a thing. It's all in your mind. Evergrande and Country Garden would've been classified TBTF in the minds of many USians, yet they failed. The dead comment below by AnthonyMouse already pointed out that even in your scenario there's no difference with the status quo anyway. It's insane that it's dead and reeks of astroturfing, as nothing about it is worth flagging. > Isn't that the other way around? The la…

Both of your supposed counterexamples are Chinese. China does things differently from the USA.
Post reply on HN