41–50 of 212 posts
What a ridiculous claim. They call computer hardware and salaries damage. I want a competent judge to make sure that these are not damages and I wish that Anna’s Archive continues to operate in sensible jurisdiction for the foreseeable future. If I had the means I would donate to them.
https://annas-archive.gs/donate
At this point, we need a service that "offers" an 8-bay (with 12TB? 14TB? drives) full with the whole ~80TB Anna's Archive. It's essentially all of human knowledge and to be frank it belongs to no one - rather...everyone. People can store this at their house, keep it offline. Just to have these seeds of knowledge everywhere. ...I suppose LLM's trained on this data, essentially their model weights and tokenization are…
You dropped a 0. Anna's Archive is currently 862.4 TB
Earlier quoted context omitted.
What would we use instead?
Copyright should expire after like 15 years. Academic publishers should not exist, research - especially publically funded research - should just go straight to the public domain.
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?
Any additional benefits to copyright holders beyond what is needed to make sure we don't lose the works are essentially graft, no different in principle to the medieval church selling lucrative offices.
If these things are valuable only because of scarcity, then we are incentivizing scarcity by granting monopoly, so we should do as little of that as we can manage. If they are inherently valuable, they should be as widely disseminated as possible (a cost that government can easily afford given modern technology). If they are worthless, there is no harm in the government keeping a copy anyway.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
What would we use instead?
Copyright should expire after like 15 years. Academic publishers should not exist, research - especially publically funded research - should just go straight to the public domain.
I lean more towards 7-10 years, with required registration involving a DRM free copy of the work submitted to the US copyright office (where possible) who will automatically host that file for free once the copyright term has expired. There should be an RSS feed from copyright.gov with download links to the latest works entering the public domain. That'd also make it dead simple to find who you need to contact if you want to negotiate rights to use a work still under copyright's protection.
I agree that anything getting public funding should be public domain on day one (normal exceptions for national security etc)
Mixed feelings about the case. Sharing is the best thing that can happen to knowledge. It is great that gatekeepers lose money over this. However, the blame of the loss might burden oclc, which might have been doing a positive job. https://www.oclc.org/en/about.html
I don't really get their dilemma. They claim that a publicly available copy of the data on Anna’s Archive is a direct threat to their business. But the same data is freely available by going to their own worldcat.org. Any library that was satisfied with pure read access to the data was already not going to pay them money.
They allege that scraping the 2.2TB of data cost them $5 million over 2 years. That's $2 per megabyte. If the cost of providing this was the only issue surely within those two years someone would have gotten the idea to just put up an XML dump for download, or to shoot Anna's Archive an email with an offer to just send them the data as soon as it became clear that it was them.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
https://annas-archive.gs/donate
Having the means normally means the extra finances to give away vs knowing the link to their donation form