4 ms·
> Hmmm. When they decided to do something so boneheaded, and so obviously going-to-seriously-piss-off a bunch of famously deep pocketed litigious publishers, th
by MrVandemar 4y ago
> Hmmm. When they decided to do something so boneheaded, and so obviously going-to-seriously-piss-off a bunch of famously deep pocketed litigious publishers, they crossed a whole bunch of lines.
But if no-one pushes against the encroaching draconian copyright laws, then they will continue to get worse. The IA has a philosophy that is counter to a lot of entrenched mainstream organisation, and this move was aligned with their philosophy, if not necessarily their best interests.
It was bold, and we're talking about it, and even testing it in court. So it went against them, which is not surprising, but it's better than if they'd just been meek, battened down the hatches, and not do anything at all.
I applaud them.
And if anyone in this thread is using the IA and hasn't donated to them recently, it's a good time to do it.
- justinclift 4y ago> But if no-one pushes against the encroaching draconian copyright laws, then they will continue to get worse. While that's true, having our custodian of archiving the internet bet the farm on stupid shit like this is outstandingly irresponsible. :( So yeah, applaud places which do it all you want. And I'll be right there with you in a lot of cases. But this? This was far past just stupid. :(