3 ms·
Heh. What’s nuts is that, stripped of other copyright-bearing context, it’s my understanding that they’d not have a (legal, but policy, maybe) leg to stand on a
by hotnfresh 3y ago
Heh. What’s nuts is that, stripped of other copyright-bearing context, it’s my understanding that they’d not have a (legal, but policy, maybe) leg to stand on asking for pricing data to be removed. That’s supposed to be free (as in freedom) to anyone who finds a way to get ahold of it. Sucks that they’re killing the entire archive over something they have no actual claim to.
- bhartzer 3y agoI agree, now that you pointed it out, there probably isn't a legal leg to stand on. IANAL, though--would be interested in hearing from an attorney about that. Regardless, if you can prove you're the website owner, then Internet Archive will remove all of your content and stop archiving your site if you ask them.
- hotnfresh 3y agoRight, by IA policy they can ask to have the site taken down. What’s unfortunate about it is that they’re doing it over data that they aren’t supposed to be able to restrict, and the rest of the site (which I doubt they much mind being on IA) is caught in the crossfire, as the means by which they’re getting the part they care about taken down. Like, they probably wouldn’t bother except that the archive happens to contain data that isn’t supposed to be restricable anyway but de facto is, if they take the whole archive of the site down.