4 ms·

I stand behind Internet Archive on this. It was the right opportunity to try and push our freedoms forward. Internet Archive is political by design, it's very e

by slim 6y ago

I stand behind Internet Archive on this. It was the right opportunity to try and push our freedoms forward. Internet Archive is political by design, it's very existence is merely tolerated by the Intellectual Property Feudalists. It was the good fight to fight.

nix23 6y ago
Same here! That is a digital lending system like every other public-library does it...
- dhosek 6y ago
  No, it really isn't. Library contracts for digital lending vary based on publisher and service provider, but aside from some very small publishers (if that), there is no publisher that allows for unlimited unmetered lending of e-books and certainly not for the price of a print book. Note also that physical books face physical wear and usually have to be retired after 25–40 (at most) lends.
  - nix23 6y ago
    >allows for unlimited unmetered lending of e-books It is metered, you can lend max 5 book for max of 1 month. >Note also that physical books face physical wear and usually have to be retired after 25–40 (at most) lends Is that something positive? Should we go back to DVD because publishers would love that, or is streaming still ok?
    - dhosek 6y ago
      It's an observation that points out that physical books are not being lent out hundred or thousands of times so the physical book argument (or the digitized physical book argument) don't hold water.
      - nix23 6y ago
        I never said anything about physical book's, many public-library have already e-books, like research-papers and so on.
        dhosek 6y ago
        Sorry, lots of commentary. The IA lending is premised on the idea that a physical book can be lent an unlimited number of times. Public library lending of e-books is premised on limited number of lends with most lends (Libby/Media on Demand being the most common of these, but there are other programs as well that work the same such as 3M's digital library offering). With Hoopla, there's a per-lend charge that takes place.
- Rebelgecko 6y ago
  What libraries use a similar system? Every one I've been to limits the number of ebooks that can be checked out
- sonofaplum 6y ago
  I'm sorry, but this is absolutely not true. You don't do IA or the discussion any favors by being inaccurate. I live in San Francisco, whose library participates in a digital ebook lending program through Libby. They have a certain number of copies of each ebook available, and allow each copy to be checked out by one person at a time. As a consequence, i've had to wait 7 or 8 weeks for popular books to become available, something which works the same way as physical books at the library. The library buys or is given a copy of a book (whether physical or digital) and then can loan out that copy of the book. Notably, this is how IA's lending program worked BEFORE the pandemic. They just decided unilaterally to change it to loan out unlimited copies of books. It is this change that the lawsuit is about.

by slim 6y ago

nix23 6y ago

Same here! That is a digital lending system like every other public-library does it...

dhosek 6y ago
No, it really isn't. Library contracts for digital lending vary based on publisher and service provider, but aside from some very small publishers (if that), there is no publisher that allows for unlimited unmetered lending of e-books and certainly not for the price of a print book. Note also that physical books face physical wear and usually have to be retired after 25–40 (at most) lends.
- nix23 6y ago
  >allows for unlimited unmetered lending of e-books It is metered, you can lend max 5 book for max of 1 month. >Note also that physical books face physical wear and usually have to be retired after 25–40 (at most) lends Is that something positive? Should we go back to DVD because publishers would love that, or is streaming still ok?
  - dhosek 6y ago
    It's an observation that points out that physical books are not being lent out hundred or thousands of times so the physical book argument (or the digitized physical book argument) don't hold water.
    - nix23 6y ago
      I never said anything about physical book's, many public-library have already e-books, like research-papers and so on.
      - dhosek 6y ago
        Sorry, lots of commentary. The IA lending is premised on the idea that a physical book can be lent an unlimited number of times. Public library lending of e-books is premised on limited number of lends with most lends (Libby/Media on Demand being the most common of these, but there are other programs as well that work the same such as 3M's digital library offering). With Hoopla, there's a per-lend charge that takes place.
Rebelgecko 6y ago
What libraries use a similar system? Every one I've been to limits the number of ebooks that can be checked out
sonofaplum 6y ago
I'm sorry, but this is absolutely not true. You don't do IA or the discussion any favors by being inaccurate. I live in San Francisco, whose library participates in a digital ebook lending program through Libby. They have a certain number of copies of each ebook available, and allow each copy to be checked out by one person at a time. As a consequence, i've had to wait 7 or 8 weeks for popular books to become available, something which works the same way as physical books at the library. The library buys or is given a copy of a book (whether physical or digital) and then can loan out that copy of the book. Notably, this is how IA's lending program worked BEFORE the pandemic. They just decided unilaterally to change it to loan out unlimited copies of books. It is this change that the lawsuit is about.