5 ms·

Public data is... public. No one should be stopped from saving a public page and nothing should stop Internet Archive, be it robot or human. There is if course

Public data is... public. No one should be stopped from saving a public page and nothing should stop Internet Archive, be it robot or human. There is if course a need for removal of archived content infringing on someone's rights, whatever that might be, but "archive with consent" will fail for the goal of preserving culture. I think it's worrying that some online newspapers enacted archive blockers or IA needing DMCA excemptions, just so companies can't DMCA anything with their name on it. To preserve journalistic integreity and to save culture, even if it collides intellectual property rights, "archive with consent" won't cut it.

orev 5y ago
Content posted on a web site is NOT “public” (domain), it is (in the US) automatically copyrighted to the author, unless they specifically waive those rights. Just because you can see it through a browser doesn’t in any way mean you can make it yours and do what you want with it.
- ImprobableTruth 5y ago
  We store books in public libraries even if they aren't public domain and authors can do nothing to prevent them from doing so.
  - rat9988 5y ago
    If you buy the book, you have an authorization to do so. But you can't put copies of it.
    - Mezzie 5y ago
      You do if you're an archive, actually.
  - ghaff 5y ago
    First sale doctrine in the US. If I buy a physical book, I can give it, loan it, throw it in the trash, etc. This doesn't apply to making electronic copies--see what happened with Google Books for example.
- FrostKiwi 5y ago
  Absolutely true. "unless they specifically waive those rights" - if archiving entailed contacting the owner with a legal archive request, we would have archived basically nothing. Luckily there are exceptions for Internet Archive in place. My point is, if "by consent" was the requirement to archive information, we would have archived nothing.
- Mezzie 5y ago
  It doesn't matter. Archives are exempt from being forbidden to create copies due to copyright infringement. The Library of Congress can make all the copies it wants, it just can't SELL them. Now, there is a question whether a private company should legally be able to BE an archive of record, but as of now there's no legal reason they can't be, I believe. So it's legal.

orev 5y ago

Content posted on a web site is NOT “public” (domain), it is (in the US) automatically copyrighted to the author, unless they specifically waive those rights. Just because you can see it through a browser doesn’t in any way mean you can make it yours and do what you want with it.

ImprobableTruth 5y ago
We store books in public libraries even if they aren't public domain and authors can do nothing to prevent them from doing so.
- rat9988 5y ago
  If you buy the book, you have an authorization to do so. But you can't put copies of it.
  - Mezzie 5y ago
    You do if you're an archive, actually.
- ghaff 5y ago
  First sale doctrine in the US. If I buy a physical book, I can give it, loan it, throw it in the trash, etc. This doesn't apply to making electronic copies--see what happened with Google Books for example.
FrostKiwi 5y ago
Absolutely true. "unless they specifically waive those rights" - if archiving entailed contacting the owner with a legal archive request, we would have archived basically nothing. Luckily there are exceptions for Internet Archive in place. My point is, if "by consent" was the requirement to archive information, we would have archived nothing.
Mezzie 5y ago
It doesn't matter. Archives are exempt from being forbidden to create copies due to copyright infringement. The Library of Congress can make all the copies it wants, it just can't SELL them. Now, there is a question whether a private company should legally be able to BE an archive of record, but as of now there's no legal reason they can't be, I believe. So it's legal.