4 ms·
I agree - A real, processional company shouldn't be skirting the law. IA is too important a source of legal archives, it shouldn't be risking that.
by Chris2048 5y ago
I agree - A real, processional company shouldn't be skirting the law. IA is too important a source of legal archives, it shouldn't be risking that.
- dredmorbius 5y agoA real, professional company? You mean such as Facebook, Apple, Amazon, Netscape, or Google?
- Chris2048 5y agoNo, none of those
- dredmorbius 5y agoThe law is in large part a creation of the interests it serves --- in the case of copyright, that being publishers. Changing that regime requires challenging the assumptions and spotlighting the harms and costs. Which is what IA undertook. It's an activist cause, yes, and one aligned with the Archive's interests and mission. To that extent, IA's action is entirely commendable.
- Chris2048 5y agoit's not in the archives interests to get sued out of existence. Breaking the law isn't just "challenging" something - they'll lose in court and set a bad precedent for future challenges. Maybe it should separate its activism from its legal, and important, archiving mission; rather than throw the baby with bathwater.
- dredmorbius 5y agoI'm not aware of the Internet Archive being sued out of existence.
- Chris2048 5y agoso it can't happen?
- dredmorbius 5y agoIt hasn't. Which suggests that the risk may have been well-considered. This could of course change, but your counterfactual remains that.
- Chris2048 5y agoHow does it suggest that? What benefit did IA derive from getting sued?
- dredmorbius 5y agoGetting sued provides for testing and asserting law. Losing is the part which you wish to avoid.
- Chris2048 5y agoSo IA picks a fight with opponents with a huge legal budget?