3 ms·

I am a fan of the Internet Archive and use the Wayback Machine regularly. I used it even more frequently when I was an editor at a metro news site. I am also

by jawns 6y ago

I am a fan of the Internet Archive and use the Wayback Machine regularly. I used it even more frequently when I was an editor at a metro news site. I am also a nonfiction author who was disappointed that the Internet Archive launched its national emergency library with flagrant disregard for copyright. Indeed, as this comment https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=23521019 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=23521019 on a previous HN thread pointed out, the choice to move from controlled digital lending to uncontrolled digital lending was especially foolish because now the publishing industry is going after it not only because of uncontrolled digital lending but also because of controlled digital lending. And while there is solid rationale for why CDL should be considered legal, there isn't yet any legislation or case law that makes it clear. So the IA put itself in a position of having to defend itself against the inevitable lawsuit from the publishing industry, and as a result, it potentially put its entire operations at risk.

marcinzm 6y ago
Unless the leadership at the IA changes I don't see a happy outcome for the IA. Even if they win this lawsuit that will just make them bolder until they do something that they don't win. There is just a conflicting set of goals between being an activist freedom of information non-profit and being a stable repository of knowledge for future generations. Right now the former is in charge, it seems, and so it's just a matter of time before they bite off too much. edit: Interestingly the mission statement of the IA is to "provide Universal Access to All Knowledge." So the leadership is arguably following the mission statement. So, really, the problem is that the IA is simply not a good custodian for long term knowledge storage and should step aside for a better aligned organization to take that over.
- xhkkffbf 6y ago
  I agree. This was a foolish, grandstanding move and they didn't back down until they were really pushed. Many authors wrote them and asked them to stop. The authors pointed out that books were available digitally or from vendors like Powell's or Amazon. But they persisted. It's hard work to create a book. I'm happy to ignore the technical violations of copyright when the archive is being an archive. But when it's destroying the livelihood of the authors, I know that we'll have fewer good works from professionals. The leadership needs to recognize that the authors are people and are often very small businesses who feel they are being crushed. If they're counting on the authors being too small to fighting an effective suit, that's very sad.

by jawns 6y ago

marcinzm 6y ago

Unless the leadership at the IA changes I don't see a happy outcome for the IA. Even if they win this lawsuit that will just make them bolder until they do something that they don't win. There is just a conflicting set of goals between being an activist freedom of information non-profit and being a stable repository of knowledge for future generations. Right now the former is in charge, it seems, and so it's just a matter of time before they bite off too much. edit: Interestingly the mission statement of the IA is to "provide Universal Access to All Knowledge." So the leadership is arguably following the mission statement. So, really, the problem is that the IA is simply not a good custodian for long term knowledge storage and should step aside for a better aligned organization to take that over.

xhkkffbf 6y ago
I agree. This was a foolish, grandstanding move and they didn't back down until they were really pushed. Many authors wrote them and asked them to stop. The authors pointed out that books were available digitally or from vendors like Powell's or Amazon. But they persisted. It's hard work to create a book. I'm happy to ignore the technical violations of copyright when the archive is being an archive. But when it's destroying the livelihood of the authors, I know that we'll have fewer good works from professionals. The leadership needs to recognize that the authors are people and are often very small businesses who feel they are being crushed. If they're counting on the authors being too small to fighting an effective suit, that's very sad.