401–410 of 470 posts
Earlier quoted context omitted.
[flagged]
Please which countries, though? China? The EU? The US? All of them have conflicting interests and you can't please all three.
This doesn't change things much , besides making domain name registration more difficult, but I continue to think this Spotify thing was a really dumb move on the part of Anna's Archive. AA is providing a valuable service to tons of people who don't have access to these books otherwise. There's a strong argument to be made for the moral goodness of that -- that even if it's illegal, it's at least in the spirit of a p…
https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=41454990
especially the following parts
> So I understand the concern that this court decision threatens the future of some forms of archiving, digital preservation and librarianship. But the existing norms and repositories this threatens exist because people established those norms and archiving projects before now, in living memory, even in the face of threats and lectures about precedent and worries about legal gray areas.
> If you want to defend and protect "the many noble aspects of the archive", you have to remember that thirty years ago, those were imagined as impossible, impractical, and (whisper it) probably illegal. In both cases, it was Kahle's vision and approach that was -- apparently -- the only way it was going to get done.
This is about the Internet archive, but it applies to Anna's even better because Anna's is an ideologically motivated project. Yes they are taking a risk, but I imagine they consider it a worthwhile risk if it has a chance of helping them build the world they want — one where copyright does not exist as it does today.
Plus, it's not like Anna's got anything more to lose anyway. If they ever get caught the publishers are going to squeeze every single cent out of their pockets anyway, so how exactly is making spotify and record companies their enemies going to cause them extra harm?
Screw AA for doing that spotify stunt - spotify disabled all API access except for paid accounts due to that. AA's greed and mass theft ruined a good thing.
"But Spotify pays the musicians!" some people might scream. While true, it is a pitiful, insulting amount.
The example that hit me the hardest was Dr. Dre, whose albums were streamed 1.5 million times and earned him $4345.
1.5 million is a platinum record album by industry standards in the US, UK, Canada and France.
$4345 isn't even enough to pay a month of rent in New York, where the court case was done.
Anna's Archive is not the ones you can blame for greed.
Default judgments are pernicious and should not exist. If the other party to a lawsuit is unwilling or unable to put up a defense, the case should still be judged on its merits and put to basic tests of fairness and propriety. As things stand, default judgment "winners" basically get everything they ask for automatically, which is not justice. Especially as it's quite common for people and small businesses to be unwi…
[flagged]
https://www.reddit.com/r/unpopularopinion/comments/bm1umw/in...
Earlier quoted context omitted.
> that are just entertainment And books aren't? What's the argument here? If it's that books serve a special purpose because they convey ideas and therefore it's a moral good to disseminate those ideas, you have to extend that to media beyond just the printed word. Music has that same potential (an even greater one, I would argue). It feels weird to pick and choose media like that.
> And books aren't? Yes, since there are non-fiction books. A book about computer architecture is less „just entertainment“ than a Spotify song.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Just use it to train / tune a LLM. Apparently, everything becomes legal if you only put the stuff into the right kind of software. That's at least what many people like to argue here on HN.
Anna's wants[1] companies to train on their data. [1] https://annas-archive.gl/blog/ai-copyright.html
I would have thought all big AI companies used Anna's Archive, but apparently only some of the US based companies used them.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Cool, feel free to create a website that does as much as lists track names and let me know how long will you survive before your hosting provider gets flooded with bullshit DMCA notices and shuts you down. I'm not talking about downloading music, I'm not even talking about some custom player for reproducing music, I'm talking about just putting say a list of songs from a playlist as plain text online.
You responded with why it isn't decentralized, not why it shouldn't be decentralized.
Here's like the dumbest use case: say you have a hundred artists you wanted to follow and be notified whenever they release any new music, without any of it slipping through the cracks because of "the algorithm" and without any sort of preference towards the most mainstream subset of those 100 artists. Once you already have an established brand and have crossed some sort of an arbitrary, almost always non-transparent threshold of clout, there are dozens of ways for you to do that. Hell, Apple will reach out to pay you to plug into their API and use their embed above everyone else's. But while you're a nobody, even this trivial use case from a technical perspective is made virtually impossible because you can't get access to any sort of API to simply plug into.
Anyways, not much of a problem to me any more as I can easily prove my side project reaches a six figure amount of people every month with no advertising, but I promise you it would be a problem to you if you ever decided to try build anything even remotely music-related.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Yes it does matter. Users need to know that the updated URL is correct and trustworthy.
This is Wikipedia. For that type of publishing please use Encyclopedia Britannica. You will get the url in the 2027 edition on print.