4 ms·

You want to have to pay the owner to be able to have a link and snippet to any publicly visible webpage? Wouldn't this be a disaster for the Internet Archive?

iso1631 4y ago
> "the Online News Act compels online platforms like Facebook and Google to share revenue with the publishers they aggregate their news from" Does internet archive aggregate news? Does it have revenue from that aggregation?
- jimmaswell 4y ago
  Once news outlets establish that they can squeeze money out of the entities that send anyone to their websites in the first place and shift the window to their crazy world view, it's not a stretch that they'll start whining about deserving money from the Internet Archive et al too.
CharlesW 4y ago
> You want to have to pay the owner to be able to have a link and snippet to any publicly visible webpage? I want Facebook to pay for building a predatory and privacy-eroding monetization machine around access and engagement related to that link and snippet. > Wouldn't this be a disaster for the Internet Archive? How to avoid splash damage should be seriously considered, for sure. It's worth noting that Internet Archive is in a much different position as a non-commercial entity that hosts content.
- jimmaswell 4y ago
  It sounds like you essentially want to pick favorites based on your feelings about the company's virtues. Either you can have a link, a basic right of the internet, and a small snippet, something covered under fair use for all of copyright's history, or you can't. The second is the beginning of the end of fair use.
  - CharlesW 4y ago
    This isn't a "feelings" argument but an argument against monopolistic, rent-seeking behavior.
    - gruez 4y ago
      But I don't see how charging a link tax is supposed to fight "monopolistic, rent-seeking behavior". It's not going to make it easier for another social media upstart to enter the market, so I don't see how it's supposed to stop "monopolistic behavior". Insofar as whatever "rent-seeking behavior" facebook is engaging in (mind elaborating on that?), I don't see how giving rent collection authority to a particular industry fixes that. At best it allows more rent seekers to collect money from the original rent seeker.
  - belorn 4y ago
    Internet Archive is not a snippet, it is the whole cloth. The whole point of the Internet Archive is to have an archive of the internet as it was and is. Fair use is inherently about picking favorites based on how something is used, for what purpose, and what impact that use has on the original source. A fairly big argument in favor that the Internet Archive falls under fair use is that the Internet Archive do not commercially compete with the original work. Can Facebook make the same argument? Facebook is free to make their own internet archive that is a mirror of the internet. That is to say, they are free to make a copy of the internet as it is without adding anything, without collecting any user information, without serving any advertisements, and without any user generated content. I do not know why Facebook as a for-profit company would do so, but in term of copyright they should be allowed to do so.

iso1631 4y ago

> "the Online News Act compels online platforms like Facebook and Google to share revenue with the publishers they aggregate their news from" Does internet archive aggregate news? Does it have revenue from that aggregation?

jimmaswell 4y ago
Once news outlets establish that they can squeeze money out of the entities that send anyone to their websites in the first place and shift the window to their crazy world view, it's not a stretch that they'll start whining about deserving money from the Internet Archive et al too.

CharlesW 4y ago

> You want to have to pay the owner to be able to have a link and snippet to any publicly visible webpage? I want Facebook to pay for building a predatory and privacy-eroding monetization machine around access and engagement related to that link and snippet. > Wouldn't this be a disaster for the Internet Archive? How to avoid splash damage should be seriously considered, for sure. It's worth noting that Internet Archive is in a much different position as a non-commercial entity that hosts content.

jimmaswell 4y ago
It sounds like you essentially want to pick favorites based on your feelings about the company's virtues. Either you can have a link, a basic right of the internet, and a small snippet, something covered under fair use for all of copyright's history, or you can't. The second is the beginning of the end of fair use.
- CharlesW 4y ago
  This isn't a "feelings" argument but an argument against monopolistic, rent-seeking behavior.
  - gruez 4y ago
    But I don't see how charging a link tax is supposed to fight "monopolistic, rent-seeking behavior". It's not going to make it easier for another social media upstart to enter the market, so I don't see how it's supposed to stop "monopolistic behavior". Insofar as whatever "rent-seeking behavior" facebook is engaging in (mind elaborating on that?), I don't see how giving rent collection authority to a particular industry fixes that. At best it allows more rent seekers to collect money from the original rent seeker.
- belorn 4y ago
  Internet Archive is not a snippet, it is the whole cloth. The whole point of the Internet Archive is to have an archive of the internet as it was and is. Fair use is inherently about picking favorites based on how something is used, for what purpose, and what impact that use has on the original source. A fairly big argument in favor that the Internet Archive falls under fair use is that the Internet Archive do not commercially compete with the original work. Can Facebook make the same argument? Facebook is free to make their own internet archive that is a mirror of the internet. That is to say, they are free to make a copy of the internet as it is without adding anything, without collecting any user information, without serving any advertisements, and without any user generated content. I do not know why Facebook as a for-profit company would do so, but in term of copyright they should be allowed to do so.