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

EFF and heavyweight legal team will defend Internet Archive against publishers

torrentfreak.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

11–20 of 275 posts

Re: EFF and heavyweight legal team will defend Internet Archive against publishers

#11

Post by nordsieck »

Vespasian wrote: post #8
TheHeretic12 wrote: post #7

I recognize some of the names here. This will be a case to watch, which ever way it goes the constructions allowed here will percolate through the law for years to come. This case hinges on the exact wording of the law that authorizes the National Emergency Library. IIRC, it basically gives copyright impunity during a declared national emergency. As far as I am aware, the coronavirus declared national emergency is st…

What law does explicitly allow the NEL? If I recall correctly, the Internet Archive decided unilaterally that they would do this due to many libraries being closed. I (not in the US) do not remember any changes to the copyright act being passed to allow this. Edit to add: They offered this globally and therefore disregarded any laws in countries which have already settled this issue. (Hint: to my knowledge not in a w…

> What law does explicitly allow the NEL?

> If I recall correctly, the Internet Archive decided unilaterally that they would do this due to many libraries being closed.

Exactly.

It's not even clear that "controlled digital lending" is in compliance with copyright law[1].

The NEL or "uncontrolled digital lending" is almost certainly not in compliance with the copyright statutes.

___

1. It's not specifically allowed, and there hasn't been any case law on it. To see arguments for controlled digital lending, go here: https://controlleddigitallending.org/whitepaper

Re: EFF and heavyweight legal team will defend Internet Archive against publishers

#12

Post by toomuchtodo »

dehrmann wrote: post #9
jjcon wrote: post #2

EFF is on the wrong side of both the law and common sense here and they will lose no matter how much they pay their legal team. Internet archive didn’t just steal from ‘publishers’ they are also stealing from authors big and small. You don’t get to give out free digital copies of books to people without permission and expect to get away with it. This exact digital/physical equivalence idea has already been through th…

Remind me not to donate to EFF. This money and time would be better spent on fighting EARN IT. The Internet Archive's best bet is to settle and apologize very publicly.

> The Internet Archive's best bet is to settle and apologize very publicly.

One should never apologize for civil disobedience against unjust laws.

Re: EFF and heavyweight legal team will defend Internet Archive against publishers

#13

Post by gpm »

jjcon wrote: post #2

EFF is on the wrong side of both the law and common sense here and they will lose no matter how much they pay their legal team. Internet archive didn’t just steal from ‘publishers’ they are also stealing from authors big and small. You don’t get to give out free digital copies of books to people without permission and expect to get away with it. This exact digital/physical equivalence idea has already been through th…

Even if you broke the law you don't just role over and give the other side whatever they want. They're inevitable going to ask for more compensation than they are entitled to (why wouldn't they), and you need to push back to make the penalty fair. That's just how our legal system is set up to work.

The EFF is on the right side of the law the same way a lawyer for a criminal is. The lawyer (eff) is fulfilling a necessary function of the judicial system even when the party they are representing is in the wrong.

The EFF has a keen interest in this case because the publishers will be doubt use this case to push for copyright maximalist interpretations of the law, and letting those interpretations become case law unchallenged is bad for society.

Edit: At a glance the vid angel lawsuit you quote is about circumventing DRM, something that is not relevant to this case since the physical books they scan have no DRM.

Re: EFF and heavyweight legal team will defend Internet Archive against publishers

#15

Post by agustif »

jjcon wrote: post #2

EFF is on the wrong side of both the law and common sense here and they will lose no matter how much they pay their legal team. Internet archive didn’t just steal from ‘publishers’ they are also stealing from authors big and small. You don’t get to give out free digital copies of books to people without permission and expect to get away with it. This exact digital/physical equivalence idea has already been through th…

I won a civil law case against the MAFIAA being the owner of a site where links to download movies and tv shows as user-generated content.

I won, but I was in Spain, not the US.

Re: EFF and heavyweight legal team will defend Internet Archive against publishers

#16

Post by marcinzm »

toomuchtodo wrote: post #12
dehrmann wrote: post #9

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Remind me not to donate to EFF. This money and time would be better spent on fighting EARN IT. The Internet Archive's best bet is to settle and apologize very publicly.

> The Internet Archive's best bet is to settle and apologize very publicly. One should never apologize for civil disobedience against unjust laws.

Most people view copyright overall as a just law even if the details are argued about.

Re: EFF and heavyweight legal team will defend Internet Archive against publishers

#17

Post by jjcon »

toomuchtodo wrote: post #12
dehrmann wrote: post #9

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Remind me not to donate to EFF. This money and time would be better spent on fighting EARN IT. The Internet Archive's best bet is to settle and apologize very publicly.

> The Internet Archive's best bet is to settle and apologize very publicly. One should never apologize for civil disobedience against unjust laws.

Quit trolling/baiting this thread - this isn’t some big corporatist conspiracy - this is protecting creator livelihoods big and small.

The vast majority of the civilized world agrees it is good to protect ‘art’ (from code to books) to keep it sustainable. Just because it can be infinitely duplicated and shared ‘freely’ does not mean it is sustainable to do so. If there is no money in art, less art will be made and most agree that this is not desirable.

Re: EFF and heavyweight legal team will defend Internet Archive against publishers

#18

Post by toomuchtodo »

jjcon wrote: post #17
toomuchtodo wrote: post #12

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> The Internet Archive's best bet is to settle and apologize very publicly. One should never apologize for civil disobedience against unjust laws.

Quit trolling/baiting this thread - this isn’t some big corporatist conspiracy - this is protecting creator livelihoods big and small. The vast majority of the civilized world agrees it is good to protect ‘art’ (from code to books) to keep it sustainable. Just because it can be infinitely duplicated and shared ‘freely’ does not mean it is sustainable to do so. If there is no money in art, less art will be made and mo…

This is not trolling or baiting (nor even intended to be). This is advocating for efforts, very public and visible, against broken public policy. Authors can still make a living without draconian copyright policy (life of the author + 70 years?) and suing libraries (!!!) for making content available during a pandemic.

> Just because it can be infinitely duplicated and shared ‘freely’ does not mean it is sustainable to do so. If there is no money in art, less art will be made and most agree that this is not desirable.

I don't believe the evidence shows this (but is a topic for another thread, "why do people create?"). People who create to create will still do so (IMHO, based on the history of humans), even if it is what it is for many people: a hobby funded by other work, the state, or private patrons through means other than controlled access to content.

Re: EFF and heavyweight legal team will defend Internet Archive against publishers

#19

Post by maxlybbert »

jjcon wrote: post #2

EFF is on the wrong side of both the law and common sense here and they will lose no matter how much they pay their legal team. Internet archive didn’t just steal from ‘publishers’ they are also stealing from authors big and small. You don’t get to give out free digital copies of books to people without permission and expect to get away with it. This exact digital/physical equivalence idea has already been through th…

I don’t remember the outcome of the particular case mentioned in https://www.theregister.com/2005/12/06/eff_needs_to_die/ , but I know their track record isn’t as good as this article’s headline implies.

Re: EFF and heavyweight legal team will defend Internet Archive against publishers

#20

Post by jjcon »

gpm wrote: post #13
jjcon wrote: post #2

EFF is on the wrong side of both the law and common sense here and they will lose no matter how much they pay their legal team. Internet archive didn’t just steal from ‘publishers’ they are also stealing from authors big and small. You don’t get to give out free digital copies of books to people without permission and expect to get away with it. This exact digital/physical equivalence idea has already been through th…

Even if you broke the law you don't just role over and give the other side whatever they want. They're inevitable going to ask for more compensation than they are entitled to (why wouldn't they), and you need to push back to make the penalty fair. That's just how our legal system is set up to work. The EFF is on the right side of the law the same way a lawyer for a criminal is. The lawyer (eff) is fulfilling a necess…

> The EFF is on the right side of the law the same way a lawyer for a criminal is.

By this definition, no lawyer can be on the wrong side - you know what is meant by the phrase ‘wrong side of the law’ stop it with the mental gymnastics.

Post reply on HN