Live data from Hacker News

Internet Archive forced to remove 500k books after publishers' court win

arstechnica.com

1–10 of 582 posts

Re: Internet Archive forced to remove 500k books after publishers' court win

#5
post #2

They should fire what even nitwit thought this obviously illegal plan was a good idea in the first place. The fallout will likely tank the entire archive in the long term.

90% of the "archive" is just mass piracy anyway

Re: Internet Archive forced to remove 500k books after publishers' court win

#6
post #2

They should fire what even nitwit thought this obviously illegal plan was a good idea in the first place. The fallout will likely tank the entire archive in the long term.

It was through lending, this was due to a change of policy of lending during COVID-19 to ease access

Re: Internet Archive forced to remove 500k books after publishers' court win

#7
post #6
post #2

They should fire what even nitwit thought this obviously illegal plan was a good idea in the first place. The fallout will likely tank the entire archive in the long term.

It was through lending, this was due to a change of policy of lending during COVID-19 to ease access

It lending done flagrantly in violation of the licensing. They were taking a copy licensed to be lent ONCE and giving it to thousands of people at once.

Re: Internet Archive forced to remove 500k books after publishers' court win

#9
post #7
post #6

Earlier quoted context omitted.

It was through lending, this was due to a change of policy of lending during COVID-19 to ease access

It lending done flagrantly in violation of the licensing. They were taking a copy licensed to be lent ONCE and giving it to thousands of people at once.

their lending scheme is timed by hour with the option to renew with some restraints, it is not lending to thousands at once

Re: Internet Archive forced to remove 500k books after publishers' court win

#10
post #9
post #7

Earlier quoted context omitted.

It lending done flagrantly in violation of the licensing. They were taking a copy licensed to be lent ONCE and giving it to thousands of people at once.

their lending scheme is timed by hour with the option to renew with some restraints, it is not lending to thousands at once

Then why did they just get their ass royally handed to them in court?
Post reply on HN