3 ms·
So if I'm reading the law[1] right, which I'm probably not, the damages for the 127 books should be around $3.8 million, with ~$20 million the absolute max? Nei
by boomboomsubban 4y ago
So if I'm reading the law[1] right, which I'm probably not, the damages for the 127 books should be around $3.8 million, with ~$20 million the absolute max? Neither of those amounts seem high enough to destroy the IA.
[1]https://www.law.cornell.edu/uscode/text/17/504 https://www.law.cornell.edu/uscode/text/17/504
- alephnerd 4y agoTheir operating expenses in 2020 hit almost $20mil [0] and they only raise around $21mil in donations. In addition they only have $9mil in assets. That means they could potentially shut down if a hardline litigation strategy is persued. In addition, this opens the gate to additional litigation to any other potential claimant (eg. Warez copyright owners or video copyright owners - there is a lot of pirated material hosted on IA). [0] - https://www.causeiq.com/organizations/internet-archive,943242767/ https://www.causeiq.com/organizations/internet-archive,94324...
- boomboomsubban 4y agoThe revenue on Wikipedia was from 2019, when for some reason they got double their usual revenue, so I may have overestimated their cash reserves. Still seems like something they could recover from. >In addition, this opens the gate to additional litigation to any other potential claimant (eg. Warez copyright owners or video copyright owners - there is a lot of pirated material hosted on IA). I don't see how. This ruling is specifically about CDL, something the rest of their archived content doesn't follow, and all those warez and video copyright holders already have the option to DMCA claim any content on the IA. I do worry this could allow other publishers to sue over past CDL practices.