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

Anna's Archive Faces Millions in Damages and a Permanent Injunction

torrentfreak.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

181–190 of 212 posts

Re: Anna's Archive Faces Millions in Damages and a Permanent Injunction

#181

Post by s1artibartfast »

laserlight wrote: post #180
s1artibartfast wrote: post #175

Earlier quoted context omitted.

>Whether IP “theft” deprives owner of anything is questionable, even in the legal sense. I think this is certainly settled in the legal sense. If an employee publishes source code to a product, or someone leaks a new movie, the courts dont have to debate if the owner has a legitimate grievance. People can debate hypothetical alternatives to IP and their implications, but the status quo is clear. If you are using "que…

> If an employee publishes source code to a product What if that product has been obsolete for a long time? It is possible that there is no harm in an IP infringement case, whereas in property theft the amount of harm incurred is the property itself at the minimum. The amount of harm, if any, is questioned by the court.

I am not at all opposed to IP reform as a general concept. There are a million corner cases, and I agree many of them should be re-examined. For example, I think the criteria for fundamental software patents should be set more conservatively.

Another consideration is use it or lose it provisions, although I am much more on the fence on this. It would essentially destroy patents which have multiple embodiments, but might make sense for literature.

I am mostly responding to the idea of tossing IP in general, Which I think is misguided. There are countless ways in which this could cause great harm and essentially gut creators in favor of manufacturers or marketers

Re: Anna's Archive Faces Millions in Damages and a Permanent Injunction

#182

Post by account42 »

odo1242 wrote: post #34
ASalazarMX wrote: post #12

They're just piling on anything they can regardless of reason. A real damage count would be lost sales due to web scraping, but they don't sell anything. > For example, the organization spent $1,548,693 on upgrades for its hardware infrastructure, and an additional $608,069 for a two-year Cloudflare contract [..] Other costs include the salaries of 34 full-time employees, who were tasked with mitigating the harm caus…

The original "damages" in a lawsuit are almost always made up. They're supposed to get adjusted downward during and after the lawsuit. This is also why having a default judgement delivered against you for failing to show up generally isn't great.

They haven't even named a defendant except for some random archivist [0] they have no evidence against. I get suing John Doe for discovery and injunction purposes but how can they even be awarded damages - no show or not - without identifying the defendant.

[0]

Re: Anna's Archive Faces Millions in Damages and a Permanent Injunction

#184

Post by account42 »

neilv wrote: post #48
rustcleaner wrote: post #33

Earlier quoted context omitted.

[flagged]

Some friends and family are likely to be on HN, and I'd assume probably don't want to see speculation like that.

What makes people go whight-knighting for merely perceived wishes? And that's before even thinking why those wishis should trump other's wish to discuss this on a public forum.

Re: Anna's Archive Faces Millions in Damages and a Permanent Injunction

#185

Post by account42 »

noman-land wrote: post #27
NuSkooler wrote: post #15

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I've been trying to convince people of this for years. The problem is from my view, that people have the idea of IP being some sort of the American Dream ingrained in their heads that they can't even reason about anything else.

What's a suitable replacement?

Removing it without replacement would be a net benefit at this point.

Re: Anna's Archive Faces Millions in Damages and a Permanent Injunction

#186

Post by account42 »

freejazz wrote: post #169
jacobr1 wrote: post #159

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The term is too long. This changes it from a fixed term, to a use-it-or-lose-it oriented policy.

Patent term is 20 years from the date of filing, and doesn't begin to run until the patent issues, which is usually years after it was filed. It's incomprehensible to me how you can seriously argue that the US patent term is too long but then should be replaced with a system that allows for an indefinite term. Do you know what a trade secret is? Trade secret already has an indefinite term. There's no reason why paten…

> Patent term is 20 years from the date of filing, and doesn't begin to run until the patent issues, which is usually years after it was filed. It's incomprehensible to me how you can seriously argue that the US patent term is too long

20 years is too long for many things where after that time the technology is no longer relevant. Remember that the entire point of intellectual property is to encourage creation in order to enrich the commons.

> but then should be replaced with a system that allows for an indefinite term.

And exponentially increasing fee does not allow an indefinite term because noone has infinite money. At some point the fee will be more than the entire global wealth.

Re: Anna's Archive Faces Millions in Damages and a Permanent Injunction

#187

Post by account42 »

freejazz wrote: post #170
snvzz wrote: post #85

Earlier quoted context omitted.

5 year, renewable twice to a maximum of 15 years, by registering and paying a nominal renewal fee (let's say $200), which is multiplied on the second renewal (let's say 3x or $600).

So after 15 years, I can start selling other people's movies and books? That seems odd.

Why is that odd? Do you think it's odd that Disney is selling fables that they did not come up with? Shared culture belonging to everyone used to be what was normal.

Re: Anna's Archive Faces Millions in Damages and a Permanent Injunction

#188

Post by account42 »

chongli wrote: post #57
advael wrote: post #3

I feel obligated to say my usual "IP is at this point doing more harm than good" spiel here but don't have the time budget to argue it with people today

IP-intensive industries contribute 41% of the US GDP and employ 44% of the US workforce [1]. If you abolished IP all of that would go away. How would you replace that? I'm not a fan of IP either but I think it's pretty hard to escape that reality. Big companies like NVIDIA (3T market cap) are almost 100% IP. IP is more-or-less central to the US's economic and security strategy. Without it, the country loses a huge am…

> all of that would go away

[citation needed]

Re: Anna's Archive Faces Millions in Damages and a Permanent Injunction

#189

Post by account42 »

chongli wrote: post #104
kragen wrote: post #97

Earlier quoted context omitted.

it's an interesting question, and hopefully after a few decades of repealing intellectual property laws, we can find out. 40 years ago it wasn't obvious that anything like nvidia could exist in the first place. possibilities include: - no company like nvidia could exist, and for chip design and fabrication we'd be stuck with companies like intel, digital, micron, samsung, and texas instruments; but many other kinds o…

fabs like tsmc would hire design firms like nvidia to produce designs to fabricate; the division of labor would be the same as at present, but banks and investors would send their money to tsmc to pay to nvidia, rather than to nvidia to pay to tsmc There’s a bit of a snag with this. Chip designs are rarely ever done from scratch. Instead they’re iterated over many years, similar to how browsers, operating systems, ot…

> The last thing the US wants to see is for China to close the technology gap on this stuff.

China doesn't have to care about US IP laws and largely already doesn't.

Re: Anna's Archive Faces Millions in Damages and a Permanent Injunction

#190

Post by account42 »

kragen wrote: post #106
chongli wrote: post #104

Earlier quoted context omitted.

fabs like tsmc would hire design firms like nvidia to produce designs to fabricate; the division of labor would be the same as at present, but banks and investors would send their money to tsmc to pay to nvidia, rather than to nvidia to pay to tsmc There’s a bit of a snag with this. Chip designs are rarely ever done from scratch. Instead they’re iterated over many years, similar to how browsers, operating systems, ot…

in the case you mention, the geopolitical considerations run strongly counter to what you suggest chinese policymakers can loosen domestic restrictions on innovation such as copyright and patent laws; then the laws in the us will only restrict us companies like nvidia. in large part this has happened, which is a major reason chinese companies (in both prc and roc) have become the leading organizations in a wide varie…

> tsmc is a chinese company

This part is wrong. TSMC is a Taiwanese company and as much as China's bullying behavior in the UN means most other contries do not officially recognize Taiwan, it still does not change the reality of the situation that Taiwan is independent in every way you can think of and the chines government has no more control over or benefit from TSMC than it does for an american company.

Post reply on HN