3 ms·
HN: Pirating a movie isn’t the same as stealing it HN now: Digital lending should be treated the same as physical lending
by jjcon 6y ago
HN: Pirating a movie isn’t the same as stealing it
HN now: Digital lending should be treated the same as physical lending
- roblabla 6y agoBoth can be correct at the same time. Pirating a movie is copyright infringement, not stealing. Digital lending is currently legally gray-zone, but the pragmatic end-game for lenders is to make it so a physical book can be digitally lent so long as the physical book is unused during the lending period. This is because it can easily be shown that the publisher doesn't incur damages, since the same amount of books are on the market at any given time.
- loeg 6y agoDigital lending is widely established and supported by publishers generally. It's not especially new at this time: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/OverDrive,_Inc.#Libraries_and_schools https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/OverDrive,_Inc.#Libraries_and_...
- basch 6y agoNow I'm waiting for a Netflix of lending, where I declare what movies I physically own, and can lend them out for credits to watch other movies. The middle man distributes a digital copy. You agree to legal responsible for any movies they distribute, that you claimed you physically owned but don't.
- rocqua 6y agoI believe that old movie-rental-stores needed more of a license than just owning the movies in order to rent them out for money.
- iso947 6y agoIn the UK, copyright law does not allow your Holme bought vhs/dvd/etc to be used for public viewing in places like oil rigs and schools, nor lending for money. I don’t recall about lending for free. Your local blockbuster had very different (In a legal sense) videos than your local Tesco - they cost more to buy. This doesn’t apply to books.
- dredmorbius 6y agoAero. Didn't work out so well. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Aereo https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Aereo
- MaxBarraclough 6y ago> This is because it can easily be shown that the publisher doesn't incur damages, since the same amount of books are on the market at any given time. This strikes me as an approximation. If, in digital lending, the licence can change-hands instantly and across any physical distance, then it's not analogous to physical lending. Two people might be able to 'time share' a single licence, in a way that wouldn't be possible with a physical book.
- adventured 6y agoHN: privacy is absolutely critical Also HN: overwhelming support for one of the world's largest privacy violators, the Internet Archive, which can never comply with GDPR or any other stringent privacy laws under any circumstances because they have no idea what's in their archive and they intentionally make it difficult to remove privacy violating content from it (which they hoovered up without permission and now you can't even stop them from doing it because they ignore robots.txt) Yay for massive, epic scale privacy violations and being an abusive parasite that intentionally doesn't follow proper site directives! Even if IA survives this debacle, they're going to get wiped out by privacy violation lawsuits in the coming decade. Their entire archive will have to be dumped, or combed line by line for privacy violating content (at extraordinary cost).
- loeg 6y agoLibraries lend movies, too. I'm not sure where that fits into your metaphor.
- jjcon 6y agoLibraries lend physical copies of movies just like they lend physical copies of books
- dredmorbius 6y agoE-lending is increasingly a thing, actually.