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

Tell HN: Internet Archive is facing a Big 4 Publishers lawsuit

news.ycombinator.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

151–160 of 226 posts

Re: Tell HN: Internet Archive is facing a Big 4 Publishers lawsuit

#151

Post by ASalazarMX »

COGlory wrote: post #6

So...they didn't think the law should apply so they just decided to ignore it? What were they expecting? How can they possibly expect to win this lawsuit? I hate copyright with all my soul but this is just stupid. You can't just decide to take the law into your own hand. This is just a waste of money and effort.

> So...they didn't think the law should apply so they just decided to ignore it?

Of course not! The IA lacks enough money or donations to crooked politicians to get away with that. Strict adherence to the laws is for common folks, so they should have complied.

Re: Tell HN: Internet Archive is facing a Big 4 Publishers lawsuit

#152

Post by Kye »

COGlory wrote: post #6

So...they didn't think the law should apply so they just decided to ignore it? What were they expecting? How can they possibly expect to win this lawsuit? I hate copyright with all my soul but this is just stupid. You can't just decide to take the law into your own hand. This is just a waste of money and effort.

Law is what's written by lawyers who realized getting elected paid off law school faster and by what's decided in courts. Courts are there to decide who and what law should apply to. You don't get a robust fair use test[1] or libraries[2] without someone testing the law in court.

[1] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Fair_use#U.S._fair_use_procedu...

[2] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bobbs-Merrill_Co._v._Straus

Re: Tell HN: Internet Archive is facing a Big 4 Publishers lawsuit

#153

Post by rasz »

_ktx2 wrote: post #147
gojomo wrote: post #127

Some people here say they like the Internet Archive, and resent copyright maximalism, but wish IA would be more legally conservative around copyright law: "follow the law!" "ask permission!" "work through other libraries!" They may not understand that none of what they like about the Internet Archive would've been possible without a bold willingness to probe the boundaries of copyright law. If you'd asked any mainstr…

One of the things I dislike the most about Internet Archive is their relatively open attitude of flaunting privacy on purpose: http://blog.archive.org/2017/04/17/robots-txt-meant-for-sear... Do you know what system they replaced robots.txt with? Email, one that is filed as a DMCA request: https://medium.com/wednesday-genius/how-to-remove-your-websi... https://jonathanwthomas.net/how-to-get-your-website-out-of-t... So…

Isnt that a response to companies buying old unused domains, slapping robots on it and thus killing whole archive of this domain going back 20 years?

Re: Tell HN: Internet Archive is facing a Big 4 Publishers lawsuit

#154

Post by randomhodler84 »

gojomo wrote: post #127

Some people here say they like the Internet Archive, and resent copyright maximalism, but wish IA would be more legally conservative around copyright law: "follow the law!" "ask permission!" "work through other libraries!" They may not understand that none of what they like about the Internet Archive would've been possible without a bold willingness to probe the boundaries of copyright law. If you'd asked any mainstr…

Uber and AirBnB didn’t get to where they are today without breaking a few laws and regulations. Archiving the digital legacy of our planet is far more important than imaginary property fantasies.

Re: Tell HN: Internet Archive is facing a Big 4 Publishers lawsuit

#155

Post by solarkraft »

I'm torn about this. I don't want my money going to silly lawsuits, I want it to go towards archiving important cultural goods.

Copyright infringement is exactly what makes it possible to provide me with that collection of Windows 7 UI sounds and similar things, but I don't know about books. There are already people archiving books and providing them to people for free, so I think this is not a role the Internet Archive needs to fill.

Save the money and fight battles that matter more ...

Re: Tell HN: Internet Archive is facing a Big 4 Publishers lawsuit

#156

Post by _ktx2 »

rasz wrote: post #153
_ktx2 wrote: post #147

Earlier quoted context omitted.

One of the things I dislike the most about Internet Archive is their relatively open attitude of flaunting privacy on purpose: http://blog.archive.org/2017/04/17/robots-txt-meant-for-sear... Do you know what system they replaced robots.txt with? Email, one that is filed as a DMCA request: https://medium.com/wednesday-genius/how-to-remove-your-websi... https://jonathanwthomas.net/how-to-get-your-website-out-of-t... So…

Isnt that a response to companies buying old unused domains, slapping robots on it and thus killing whole archive of this domain going back 20 years?

Could be! However, making a direct attack on individual privacy should never have been an option. To make matters worse, the logic of, "We did this to government and military websites, so now we're going to roll it out everywhere" was quite broken for the time and remains so.

There's examples of how this works in a healthy way. Martin Manley is one scenario that comes to mind, where he overtly opted-in to having an archive stored about him upon his death: https://martin-manley.eprci.com/

Re: Tell HN: Internet Archive is facing a Big 4 Publishers lawsuit

#157

Post by randomhodler84 »

xhkkffbf wrote: post #141
dbingham wrote: post #97

Earlier quoted context omitted.

"This law I broke shouldn't exist" is the basis of civil disobedience and is how many of the freedoms we enjoy were won and the oppressive laws of recent history were struck down. It may or may not succeed in courts, because our "justice" system is anything but. Even if it doesn't succeed in court, it's still a worthwhile stance and it may succeed in other ways. Especially if enough people who recognize where justice…

Rent is the basis for all forms of savings through investment. It allows people to work hard for a time and then take some time off. Yes, some will be rent seeking while drinking rum at the beach bar, but so will the sick people and the retired people. Rent makes it possible for society to offer disability insurance and retirement savings.

And Usury was well known to the ancients as one way to destroy a society.

Rent is not the basis of savings through investment, yield is; of which rent is one kind. Renting a movie at blockbuster made sense in the 90s as plastic shells of magstripe were a scarce good. Today, literally millions of devices could stream their entire lib for free via ad supported streaming apps.

We live in different times. Holding on to artificial constraints for old-times business model nostalgia will look so quaint in a few decades.

Re: Tell HN: Internet Archive is facing a Big 4 Publishers lawsuit

#158

Post by yellowapple »

orev wrote: post #139
yellowapple wrote: post #117

Earlier quoted context omitted.

My code is already free. The service I provide is creating new code, not selling existing code. Contrast with publishers, where it's the other way around.

Not knowing anything about you, I’m going to assume you mean code that you created and chose to release as OSS. That’s your choice, and publishers have the same right to release their works under different terms (through agreements with the authors they have signed, etc). You don’t have any say over what other creators choose to do with their works, and if they choose terms you don’t like, you can’t just ignore them.…

> I’m going to assume you mean code that you created and chose to release as OSS.

It doesn't matter how the output is licensed; I'm paid for the process of creating that output, not for the perpetual profiting over that finite output. That's the point you're missing.

Re: Tell HN: Internet Archive is facing a Big 4 Publishers lawsuit

#159

Post by daniel_reetz »

_ktx2 wrote: post #156
rasz wrote: post #153

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Isnt that a response to companies buying old unused domains, slapping robots on it and thus killing whole archive of this domain going back 20 years?

Could be! However, making a direct attack on individual privacy should never have been an option. To make matters worse, the logic of, "We did this to government and military websites, so now we're going to roll it out everywhere" was quite broken for the time and remains so. There's examples of how this works in a healthy way. Martin Manley is one scenario that comes to mind, where he overtly opted-in to having an a…

With respect, I fail to see how a public website is a privacy matter.
Post reply on HN