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

If we lose the Internet Archive, we’re screwed

sbstatesman.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

171–180 of 614 posts

Re: If we lose the Internet Archive, we’re screwed

#171

Post by jacquesm »

Spooky23 wrote: post #116
Xelynega wrote: post #49

Earlier quoted context omitted.

They're not in court for the emergency library. They're in court for the 1-1 CDL lending they did. I'm tired of seeing this "well IA shouldn't have done the emergency library" line. Do you honestly believe the only reason publishers went after IA is the emergency library? I think this would have happened eventually, so pointing to the emergency library does nothing but tell everyone that you were right all along. The…

The “emergency library” was a gift on a silver platter for the publishers. It was a reckless and stupid action that made the worst case scenario that the publishers wouldn’t have been taken seriously about a reality. Obviously the 1-1 lending was an issue to the publishers, but higher risk from a litigation perspective.

And it is strictly speaking not a thing that IA should be doing in the first place. They should have set up a completely different legal entity for this and kept them visibly separated on all fronts, especially online.

Re: If we lose the Internet Archive, we’re screwed

#172

Post by thaumaturgy »

rsync wrote: post #156
Xelynega wrote: post #49

Earlier quoted context omitted.

They're not in court for the emergency library. They're in court for the 1-1 CDL lending they did. I'm tired of seeing this "well IA shouldn't have done the emergency library" line. Do you honestly believe the only reason publishers went after IA is the emergency library? I think this would have happened eventually, so pointing to the emergency library does nothing but tell everyone that you were right all along. The…

"I'm tired of seeing this "well IA shouldn't have done the emergency library" line." I appreciate that. However, as a long-time, regular, sustaining financial benefactor of IA, I was annoyed that they strayed into this set of activities in the first place and then dismayed when they pushed the envelope on it during C19 quarantines. I, and others, predicted this trouble and even if there is not direct causation why do…

I mean, their mission statement is "universal access to all knowledge". They had to push these boundaries because it's their purpose. The boundaries themselves are dumb and arbitrary (see e.g. https://www.npr.org/2022/11/09/1135639385/libraries-publishe...). Maybe the publishers are deserving of more criticism than the Archive here?

Re: If we lose the Internet Archive, we’re screwed

#173

Post by schroeding »

causi wrote: post #19

which made copyrighted books available for free during the COVID-19 pandemic. The publishers behind the lawsuit alleged that this entailed copyright infringement. Along with everybody with two brain cells to rub together. We all screamed "Hey, you idiots are going to ruin everything if you act like the pandemic has magically nullified the concept of copyright" and they fucking did it anyway, and now exactly what we s…

Totally agree with the first part.

> Controlled digital lending had a chance of getting off the ground. The IA's Emergency Library's unlimited digital lending burned it to the ground and stomped on the ashes.

One of the problems libraries face is that many publishers will not sell them "real" licenses, but only "quota licenses" that allow a total of n borrows and m concurrent borrows. Once the total number of borrows is exceeded, the license expires. n can be very low.

This was not always the case. 10 years ago, most licenses were unrestricted licenses that allowed an unlimited number of total borrows, but only limited the number of m concurrent borrows at a time - just like it would be if the library bought m real books.

The argument is that real books wear out - digital books don't. However, my local librarian vehemently disagrees with this statement, as many books survive more than 100 borrows, something the new e-book licenses will never manage.

Additionally, those "quota" licenses are still way more expensive than an equal amount of m real, physical books. It's insanity. My local library could, by their own account, not survive if the number of digital lends permanently increased significantly (like it did in 2020).

So if controlled digital lending had a chance for the mainstream, the publishers killed it many years ago, when many of them decided to just not sell libraries unrestricted licenses anymore, but only "quota" licenses. :/

(Disclaimer: Not the US, Europe)

Re: If we lose the Internet Archive, we’re screwed

#174

Post by splitstud »

hyperhello wrote: post #28
mistrial9 wrote: post #12

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> US runs on money not culture fortunately, someone saying that does not make it real. Think of a "soup" and of "experiment" and you will get more detail. Resolving an entire nation to a 1 or 0 classification is not defensible, right?

Resolving the statement to a 1/0 classification isn't necessary. If the US ran on culture, the archive would be considered a jewel; but the US runs on money so it's seen as an underoptimization. If you're predicting what a group would do in a specific case and decision, it really is correct to apply generalizations.

[dead]

Re: If we lose the Internet Archive, we’re screwed

#175

Post by nerpderp82 »

dumbotron wrote: post #128
__MatrixMan__ wrote: post #16

Earlier quoted context omitted.

They're doing us all a favor is what they're doing. Intellectual property is just not that important when compared with ensuring that the powerful can't rewrite history. If they lose their case, I hope the project can be kept afloat in ways that the US government can't interfere with.

> ensuring that the powerful can't rewrite history That overstates IA's influence. People still think Elon started Tesla.

[flagged]

Re: If we lose the Internet Archive, we’re screwed

#176

Post by z0r »

rsync wrote: post #156
Xelynega wrote: post #49

Earlier quoted context omitted.

They're not in court for the emergency library. They're in court for the 1-1 CDL lending they did. I'm tired of seeing this "well IA shouldn't have done the emergency library" line. Do you honestly believe the only reason publishers went after IA is the emergency library? I think this would have happened eventually, so pointing to the emergency library does nothing but tell everyone that you were right all along. The…

"I'm tired of seeing this "well IA shouldn't have done the emergency library" line." I appreciate that. However, as a long-time, regular, sustaining financial benefactor of IA, I was annoyed that they strayed into this set of activities in the first place and then dismayed when they pushed the envelope on it during C19 quarantines. I, and others, predicted this trouble and even if there is not direct causation why do…

In the same boat. Haven't stopped donating as a result, which is a sentiment I've seen repeated elsewhere. It was still upsetting to see the organization I support put so much of why I donate to them at risk for something with so little upside.

Re: If we lose the Internet Archive, we’re screwed

#177

Post by MattGaiser »

thaumaturgy wrote: post #172
rsync wrote: post #156

Earlier quoted context omitted.

"I'm tired of seeing this "well IA shouldn't have done the emergency library" line." I appreciate that. However, as a long-time, regular, sustaining financial benefactor of IA, I was annoyed that they strayed into this set of activities in the first place and then dismayed when they pushed the envelope on it during C19 quarantines. I, and others, predicted this trouble and even if there is not direct causation why do…

I mean, their mission statement is "universal access to all knowledge". They had to push these boundaries because it's their purpose. The boundaries themselves are dumb and arbitrary (see e.g. https://www.npr.org/2022/11/09/1135639385/libraries-publishe... ). Maybe the publishers are deserving of more criticism than the Archive here?

Have the risky stuff done by another legal entity perhaps?

Re: If we lose the Internet Archive, we’re screwed

#179

Post by ghaff »

ncallaway wrote: post #167
ghaff wrote: post #162

Earlier quoted context omitted.

It's a reasonable question. I don't get to call myself an archive or museum and assemble a website of what I consider "culturally important" cartoons or comic strips or whatever. The Wayback Machine basically operates in the zone of most people don't care that they do this.

I mean, they were sued for copyright infringement and settled out of court at least once, so it’s not a negligible risk. I guess my question is largely “Does someone with ‘better judgement’ even start the internet archive?” I don’t have the answer, but I think it’s at least plausible that the answer is “no”.

I assume any competent IP lawyer would have told them that there was no law allowing them to do what they wanted to do. (IANAL)

On the other hand, to the degree that you can operate in a zone that involves poking as few sleeping lions as you can (and deal with the odd copyright infringement suit or complaint), that's maybe OK. The problem I see here is that the IA seems to have incrementally tried "ooching" more and more things some of which were almost certainly less central to their mission and harder lion pokes.

Re: If we lose the Internet Archive, we’re screwed

#180

Post by Aeolun »

rsync wrote: post #156
Xelynega wrote: post #49

Earlier quoted context omitted.

They're not in court for the emergency library. They're in court for the 1-1 CDL lending they did. I'm tired of seeing this "well IA shouldn't have done the emergency library" line. Do you honestly believe the only reason publishers went after IA is the emergency library? I think this would have happened eventually, so pointing to the emergency library does nothing but tell everyone that you were right all along. The…

"I'm tired of seeing this "well IA shouldn't have done the emergency library" line." I appreciate that. However, as a long-time, regular, sustaining financial benefactor of IA, I was annoyed that they strayed into this set of activities in the first place and then dismayed when they pushed the envelope on it during C19 quarantines. I, and others, predicted this trouble and even if there is not direct causation why do…

> why do they have to tickle this dragon in the first place

I find that doing worthwhile things and tickling the dragon go hand in hand most of the time.

Post reply on HN