3 ms·

The Internet Archive model of CDL to everyone on the Web, not just local library card members, is a particular threat. There are many books for which a single

The Internet Archive model of CDL to everyone on the Web, not just local library card members, is a particular threat. There are many books for which a single CDL copy is probably sufficient to satisfy the entire global demand for that book. They will be referenced from time to time by academics or independent researchers and almost never read cover-to-cover. If every college/university and big city library needs to own a copy so that their members can get access to it, that's not such a big problem, you can still sell maybe 1,000 copies. But if everyone can share a single copy, that is a big problem.

tablespoon 4y ago
> If every college/university and big city library needs to own a copy so that their members can get access to it, that's not such a big problem, you can still sell maybe 1,000 copies. But if everyone can share a single copy, that is a big problem. And if they can do that, it probably means that copy will never be written, or priced at $20,000 or something.
Kalium 4y ago
If it's that large a problem, they should have no difficulty at all showing that the Emergency Library did them major financial harm. Right?
- allturtles 4y ago
  What I'm talking about has nothing to do with the emergency library, it's true even under controlled digital lending (which is what the suit is about).
  - Kalium 4y ago
    The Emergency Library is relevant because it's the matter currently in court where the publishers have an excellent chance to prove exactly how much this is hurting them. What I was implying is that they can't prove any such thing. Perhaps I am mistaken, but I am not the only skeptical party: https://arstechnica.com/tech-policy/2023/03/book-publishers-with-surging-profits-struggle-to-prove-internet-archive-hurt-sales/ https://arstechnica.com/tech-policy/2023/03/book-publishers-...
    - allturtles 4y ago
      You are mistaken, the matter currently in court is a suit targeting controlled digital lending, not the Emergency Library. e.g. see [0]. This confusion about what the suit is about seems common though. [0]: https://www.eff.org/cases/hachette-v-internet-archive https://www.eff.org/cases/hachette-v-internet-archive

tablespoon 4y ago

> If every college/university and big city library needs to own a copy so that their members can get access to it, that's not such a big problem, you can still sell maybe 1,000 copies. But if everyone can share a single copy, that is a big problem. And if they can do that, it probably means that copy will never be written, or priced at $20,000 or something.

Kalium 4y ago

If it's that large a problem, they should have no difficulty at all showing that the Emergency Library did them major financial harm. Right?

allturtles 4y ago
What I'm talking about has nothing to do with the emergency library, it's true even under controlled digital lending (which is what the suit is about).
- Kalium 4y ago
  The Emergency Library is relevant because it's the matter currently in court where the publishers have an excellent chance to prove exactly how much this is hurting them. What I was implying is that they can't prove any such thing. Perhaps I am mistaken, but I am not the only skeptical party: https://arstechnica.com/tech-policy/2023/03/book-publishers-with-surging-profits-struggle-to-prove-internet-archive-hurt-sales/ https://arstechnica.com/tech-policy/2023/03/book-publishers-...
  - allturtles 4y ago
    You are mistaken, the matter currently in court is a suit targeting controlled digital lending, not the Emergency Library. e.g. see [0]. This confusion about what the suit is about seems common though. [0]: https://www.eff.org/cases/hachette-v-internet-archive https://www.eff.org/cases/hachette-v-internet-archive