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

601–610 of 614 posts

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

#601

Post by account42 »

UberFly wrote: post #483
Kim_Bruning wrote: post #478

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I agree that it would be great if creators get to eat. Right now though many people don't get to eat (enough) no matter what, many other people don't get to make use of creative work, and a small number of big players walk away with all the money. IMO pretty much literally anything else would probably put us in a better situation. At this point after several decades of experience, I think even just outright abolishin…

How would abolishing copyright law not make everyone (but the content creator) basically the equivalent of a vampire AI corporation slurping up what they please? Why would anyone create when everyone instantly gets to use their hard work in any way they want? It's like abolishing all property rights.

> Why would anyone create when everyone instantly gets to use their hard work in any way they want?

Because creating is part of human nature. Many creators actually enjoy doing what they do.

Now I don't disagree that it is in our interest to make sure that people can afford to create but that doesn't have to mean copyright at all.

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

#602

Post by account42 »

modriano wrote: post #357
GenericDev wrote: post #308

I'm so sick of modern businesses and their vampire approach on creativity and intelligent property. I see a lot of comments in this thread with what about-isms or "I don't care, we wouldn't miss anything", but these people are short-sighted. And to be honest the hacker news community is frequently the community I loathe to engage in these topics with. Because they are always looking forward with very little respect f…

> I am so sick and tired of the copyright laws that play counter to productive creation and stymying efforts to preserve anything. The fact that I have to wait until people die until copyright is up is god awful. So what's the right way to balance the need to preserve artistic/creative works and the rights of the creator to monitize or permit usage of their works? It seems rather gross to just say that the creator ha…

The "rights of the creator to monitize or permit usage of their works" are only something we as a society grant in order to incentivize more creation. There is nothing that needs to be balanced. The creators also have no "right" to make a profit either.

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

#603

Post by account42 »

halostatue wrote: post #441
justinpombrio wrote: post #370

Earlier quoted context omitted.

How about copyright reverts to its original duration of 14 years with an opt-in renewal for an additional 14 years? https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Copyright_law_of_the_United_St...

Various treaties that have been signed and approved prevent that. Copyright longer than 14–28 years is not a bad thing, but copyright for longer than ~50 years is IMO questionable. I’d love to see some of those treaties renegotiated to limit copyright duration for Works for Hire (e.g., most software out there), but also to reduce the overall length of protection…BUT. I’d also love to see RAND compulsory licensing on…

Thank you for identifying another huge issue with copyright: That it infringes the right of individual nations for self-determination.

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

#604

Post by account42 »

kelnos wrote: post #445
shagie wrote: post #431

Earlier quoted context omitted.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Berne_Convention > The Berne Convention states that all works except photographic and cinematographic shall be protected for at least 50 years after the author's death, but parties are free to provide longer terms, as the European Union did with the 1993 Directive on harmonising the term of copyright protection. This is not an American thing. And the Berne convention was four decades bef…

Kinda irrelevant if it's an American thing or not. The US didn't become a party to the Berne Convention treaty until 1989, over 100 years later, but had been increasing copyright terms long before that[0]. We (and others) could just as easily withdraw from it, and make our own rules for works that originate in the US. We could even be nice and honor the copyright terms placed on works that originate in Berne Conventi…

> even 25 or 50 years would be much more kind to the commons than what we have now

More kind perhaps but really anything that prevents you as an adult from building on the works that your grew up on is a shitty deal for society.

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

#605

Post by account42 »

manoDev wrote: post #434
modriano wrote: post #357

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> I am so sick and tired of the copyright laws that play counter to productive creation and stymying efforts to preserve anything. The fact that I have to wait until people die until copyright is up is god awful. So what's the right way to balance the need to preserve artistic/creative works and the rights of the creator to monitize or permit usage of their works? It seems rather gross to just say that the creator ha…

Capitalism causes some contradictions, this is one of those: you need a complicated/expensive scheme to lawfully defend the rights of content creators because the only possible incentive for producing content is monetary return from selling artificially scarce copies of this content. In a world where content producers were financed anyway , because we understood as a society that this is valuable, this waste wouldn’t…

> the only possible incentive for producing content is monetary return

This isn't true. Most "content" created is not fincancially rewarded at all.

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

#606

Post by account42 »

pdntspa wrote: post #508
GenericDev wrote: post #308

I'm so sick of modern businesses and their vampire approach on creativity and intelligent property. I see a lot of comments in this thread with what about-isms or "I don't care, we wouldn't miss anything", but these people are short-sighted. And to be honest the hacker news community is frequently the community I loathe to engage in these topics with. Because they are always looking forward with very little respect f…

"bUt cReAtOrS NeEd tO bE pAiD!!" whined the masses

So let's pay them.

"bUt tHaTs SoCiAlIsM" whined the masses

For some reason it's ok with extra steps that fuck over everyone else and mainly lead profit towards few middle men though.

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

#607

Post by account42 »

PuppyTailWags wrote: post #246
0xfffafaCrash wrote: post #237

Earlier quoted context omitted.

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 i…

> 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.

You can apply all those scenarious to other jobs that don't earn effectively-perpetual income from their work. They generally have to rely on the government to keep them alive. Why should "creatives" get a better deal?

I'm all for making sure that artists (and everyone else) has enough to live so that they can make a positive contribution to society. But out of all the different possible ways to accomplish that, infringing on the basic rights of everyone to share and build on their culture has got to be one of the worst.

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

#608

Post by account42 »

matwood wrote: post #424
tristor wrote: 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…

> what the IA did here is absolutely the right thing > I don't understand the backlash in the comments here I support CDL, and copyright change. IA may have poisoned the well by not actually doing CDL and trying to profit off of the claimed CDL books. So the backlash is understandable.

The first mistake IA made was engaging in CDL aka DRM in the first place. They should have just focused on making things available without restrictions.

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

#609

Post by account42 »

kwo wrote: post #146
ghaff wrote: post #106

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Pretty much "everything" (other than public domain) on the IA is on shaky ground. It's been mostly OK because very few people object to the archiving of their public web pages (especially given the IA respects robots.txt even retroactively) and, as you say, old magazines that basically have zero commercial value.

IA stopped respecting robots.txt in 2017. I had to issue a DCMA takedown to get my sites delisted. They are arrogant and think themselves above normal netiquette. They deserve to lose. https://blog.archive.org/2017/04/17/robots-txt-meant-for-sea...

If anyone is arrogant it's those that think they can make information publicly available but then still control where it is shared.

You don't get to define "netiquette" to whatever you want it to be.

robots.txt in particular has been a giant mistake that only seves to entrench Google. Anyone that wants to archive or index the web as it appears to humans SHOULD ignore it.

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

#610

Post by account42 »

tech234a wrote: post #252
kwo wrote: post #146

Earlier quoted context omitted.

IA stopped respecting robots.txt in 2017. I had to issue a DCMA takedown to get my sites delisted. They are arrogant and think themselves above normal netiquette. They deserve to lose. https://blog.archive.org/2017/04/17/robots-txt-meant-for-sea...

A relevant (yet incomplete) list of exclusions: https://wiki.archiveteam.org/index.php/List_of_websites_excl...

More as a hall of shame list than anything.

And of course it contains websites that themselves are all about users sharing content without regards to copyright or even attribution.

Post reply on HN