Live data from Hacker News

If we lose the Internet Archive, we’re screwed

sbstatesman.com

241–250 of 614 posts

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

#241

Earlier quoted context omitted.

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?

I mean if I poke an angry drunk and he beats the tar out of me, the angry drunk certainly deserves criticism but all of my friends will be "WTF why did you go and poke him?"

Publishers acting as angry dunks, checks out.

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

#242
Could we partially back up the Internet Archive to Filecoin?

According to https://file.app/ storing 1PB of data to Filecoin for a year would cost $2,336, that's an amount that could be crowdfunded.

Of course, IA has much more than a petabyte of data, but it wouldn't be impractical to save the most important ( however you decide that ) parts of it.

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

#243
post #210

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I keep seeing this really bad take repeated on this site in the absence of more nuanced, informed legal opinions. Whether CDL is legal under Fair Use or not was/is legally unresolved. Whether it's legally permissible to copy a printed material and distribute that copy as though it were the printed material was/is unresolved. Lots of organizations have been skating along under one interpretation of Fair Use as a worka…

it was going to be tested, and IA are exactly the right organization to test it CDL being legalized is dependent on the concept that it respects copyright and is only a digital version of rights and practices that already exist. The NEL proved that as far as the IA is concerned, CDL is nothing of the sort and is in actuality just a method of keeping rightsholders from suing them and what they'd really rather be doing…

Not wanting to be a library isn't illegal. The actions of IA don't have any bearing on the legality of CDL. You've made it clear that you don't like what they did with NEL and that's reasonable enough, I think extrapolation from there is unwarranted.

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

#244

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> Controlled digital lending had a chance of getting off the ground. sure, it may have worked, but fuck me if that's what we get. controlled digital lending means we throw away[1] the great advantage brought by digital technology. controlled digital lending is a very stupid thing to do. I saw megaupload. it showed us all that we can all share it all; we just don't seem to want to, or rather, the American government p…

Might be interesting to start a large "online library" that does physical books by mail. Similar to Netflix original dvd model, but for books. An annual membership fee of like $20/yr to help maintain storage infrastructure. Then ship those books to/from people in reusable boxes for bigger/unwieldy books or padded envelopes if that's sufficient for less expensive paperback. Small per-lend fee to cover the shipping cos…

Everything old is new again. That's literally how for-profit subscription libraries (which often used to also ship books to people too far away to visit the physical library) used to work in the 18th and 19th century prior to widespread public libraries. The existence of these libraries even influenced the style of novels at the time. Because each volume was treated as a separate rental, novels became longer and longer so that they could be split across multiple volumes (most typically 3).

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Subscription_library https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Three-volume_novel

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

#245
post #30
post #6

Earlier quoted context omitted.

>> I wonder if there needs to be a cultural equivalent, where a repository of digital or physical artifacts is "too big to fail" because of the negative cultural impact their failure would have. You can wonder all you like, and call me a cynic, but the US runs on money not culture. The American identity is built on money and wealth and excess, not on anything you might describe as "culture". The IA would not "fail" i…

The USA's biggest export is our culture...like it or not. Think of movies, music, etc. Some of it is intangible.

[flagged]

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

#246

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I don't think I agree with this. Novels can take years to write, and to have their copyright expire after only a few years may not be enough for the author to write another book. What would be the motivation to write a series if the series isn't worth printing after only a few books? It goes doubly if the novel might be up for a movie or a TV adaptation: the game of thrones tv adaptation didn't happen until much late…

I’d argue that copyright and intellectual property more broadly shouldn’t exist. That wouldn’t lead to the end of culture but a cultural explosion as people became able to remix and propagate ideas more freely without the fear of punishment for violating artificial state-enforced monopolies. No one is obligated to create a work and no one is obligated to share their created works with others. There’s no inherent righ…

Then how should any artists make any income at all from their work? I'm not talking about 0.0001% lucky creators with huge compensation. I mean the 70 year old with cancer who cannot write anymore. I mean the 35 year old disabled artist who cannot work a "normal" salaried job. I mean the artist from an underdeveloped country who became popular and now the "wealthy" countries want to translate and publish their work in their relatively wealthy markets. [These are all real cases I'm familiar with, as a person who actually is in community regularly with working-class authors.]

The world in which you speak of where art existed outside of notions of intellectual property meant only the wealthy and well-connected could be artists, whereas with copyright a cancer-fighting, aging, midlist author can still demand royalty payments if Disney bought his books and are still selling them for profit (Alan Dean Foster, specifically). Peter S. Beagle (The Last Unicorn author) was put through elder abuse and lived in poverty, and only many years later was he able to regain rights to his work back as well as force recompense for harm committed to him- this wouldn't work if the rights to his work expired while he was being abused.

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

#247
post #159
post #97

AI was foolish and irresponsible. Republishing books without limitations would almost surely provoke a law suit that they would almost surely lose. Not only is it a waste of resources, but now that they are in court they could very easily receive a judgement that curtails access they used to provide before the rollout of the "emergency library". It's fine (and right, IMO) if you don't agree with the current copyright…

IA autocorrect?

lol, it could've be me, I have AI on the brain lately.

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

#248
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…

good sir, the pandemic magically nullified the idea of basic human rights.

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

#249
post #56

Frankly, what the IA did here is absolutely the right thing. Copyright in the US is horribly fundamentally broken, and the idea that factual information about our history and world should not be referenceable and accessible for free is a pretty heinous one. Information wants to be free, and the work that IA did for "digital lending" during the pandemic was an essential move in the direction of ensuring that people ca…

I agree with the sentiment, but not IA's risky approach. What did IA assume? That publishers would look the other way, that their actions would inspire copyright reform, that executive power would pardon them post-reform? Those are some crazy assumptions. I'd think a consumer revolt championed by IA would have been more effective while not jeopardizing the archive, i.e. "Information wants to be free, digital lending costs nothing. Contact your congressperson about copyright reform."

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

#250

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I mean if I poke an angry drunk and he beats the tar out of me, the angry drunk certainly deserves criticism but all of my friends will be "WTF why did you go and poke him?"

Publishers acting as angry dunks, checks out.

I mean, in a way poking an angry drunk makes more sense given that the angry drunk might get arrested for battery.

In my estimation, there is zero chance that any positive change that IA might want out of the publishing company will come from the emergency lending program, and there's a non-zero chance that the IA will get shutdown because of it.

Post reply on HN