4 ms·

The short answer is no, it’s not legal. The longer answer is that the Internet Archive’s goal is preservation of content and ensuring that it can be accessed an

by brirec 4y ago

The short answer is no, it’s not legal. The longer answer is that the Internet Archive’s goal is preservation of content and ensuring that it can be accessed and used as time goes by. Notice there’s no Donkey Kong or Donkey Kong Jr. there — I’m sure they didn’t forget them, but Nintendo is very aggressive when it comes to protecting their copyrights. Archive.org does respond to DMCA requests, but they definitely don’t look hard for re-uploads of content that’s been taken down in the past. Honestly I think this is a good thing, because without internet archives and the mass preservation of data they perform we’d collectively lose a whole lot of knowledge gained over the years. I really lament the fact that so much of the modern internet is behind authentication or other means to prevent archiving.

zozbot234 4y ago
> ...Honestly I think this is a good thing, ... I don't think this is the case. My understanding is that, being officially a non-profit "library" and an "archive", Internet Archive is in the unique position of not having to delete content that gets DMCA'd by the copyright owner. They can just remove access to it by the general public, while still preserving it so that it can be made available once copyright on it expires, or even be accessed with permission, e.g. for research purposes that can be assumed to be protected by fair use. Where stuff can get controversial is when the Internet Archive lets just anyone access material that's still in copyright, but that's exactly what's addressed by the DMCA takedown process.
- db48x 4y ago
  You don’t have to call yourself a library in order to keep or possess works copyrighted by others. You are only restricted from making new copies and distributing those new copies to others. You may make new copies for archival or other personal purposes, provided you don’t distribute them to others. You may, however, distribute to others the copies that you got from someone else. (You can lend, sell, or give them away; all are legal.) That is, if you buy a copy of some copyrighted work (such as a book or CD or a computer game), you can legally sell that copy on to someone else. You can also duplicate that work for your own purposes, provided you don't distribute those copies to anyone else. Naturally if you have made copies for personal purposes, you are supposed to destroy them if you pass the “original” copy on to someone else. If you don’t then you have made additional copies and distributed them, which is copyright infringement. That is one reason that the Internet Archive keeps their “original” copies of any physical item that they digitize in one of their warehouses. It is also why they keep track of how many of those “original” copies that they possess, and use that to limit the number of digital copies that they lend out at any one time. It is also why they try to keep track of the original publication date of those works, so that they can open them up to unlimited distribution once they get old enough that they no longer qualify for copyright protection. In few days, pretty much everything created in the US in 1927 becomes part of the Public Domain! <https://blog.archive.org/2022/11/30/public-domain-day-2023-remix-contest-the-internet-archive-is-looking-for-creative-short-films-made-by-you/ https://blog.archive.org/2022/11/30/public-domain-day-2023-r...>

by brirec 4y ago

zozbot234 4y ago

> ...Honestly I think this is a good thing, ... I don't think this is the case. My understanding is that, being officially a non-profit "library" and an "archive", Internet Archive is in the unique position of not having to delete content that gets DMCA'd by the copyright owner. They can just remove access to it by the general public, while still preserving it so that it can be made available once copyright on it expires, or even be accessed with permission, e.g. for research purposes that can be assumed to be protected by fair use. Where stuff can get controversial is when the Internet Archive lets just anyone access material that's still in copyright, but that's exactly what's addressed by the DMCA takedown process.

db48x 4y ago
You don’t have to call yourself a library in order to keep or possess works copyrighted by others. You are only restricted from making new copies and distributing those new copies to others. You may make new copies for archival or other personal purposes, provided you don’t distribute them to others. You may, however, distribute to others the copies that you got from someone else. (You can lend, sell, or give them away; all are legal.) That is, if you buy a copy of some copyrighted work (such as a book or CD or a computer game), you can legally sell that copy on to someone else. You can also duplicate that work for your own purposes, provided you don't distribute those copies to anyone else. Naturally if you have made copies for personal purposes, you are supposed to destroy them if you pass the “original” copy on to someone else. If you don’t then you have made additional copies and distributed them, which is copyright infringement. That is one reason that the Internet Archive keeps their “original” copies of any physical item that they digitize in one of their warehouses. It is also why they keep track of how many of those “original” copies that they possess, and use that to limit the number of digital copies that they lend out at any one time. It is also why they try to keep track of the original publication date of those works, so that they can open them up to unlimited distribution once they get old enough that they no longer qualify for copyright protection. In few days, pretty much everything created in the US in 1927 becomes part of the Public Domain! <https://blog.archive.org/2022/11/30/public-domain-day-2023-remix-contest-the-internet-archive-is-looking-for-creative-short-films-made-by-you/ https://blog.archive.org/2022/11/30/public-domain-day-2023-r...>