3 ms·

That is incorrect. Libraries regularly scan and OCR books to make them digitally accessible and searchable. I hope the likes of the Library of Congress are rea

That is incorrect. Libraries regularly scan and OCR books to make them digitally accessible and searchable. I hope the likes of the Library of Congress are ready to shutdown their online services.

EarlKing 2y ago
Digitally accessible and searchable on site, not on line... unless you're saying the Library of Congress makes *in copyright* works available on line to all comers?
- codedokode 2y ago
  What is the difference between lending a book in the library building and over the Internet from the library website? Lending over Internet is better because it saves the user from transportation cost, allows to read books at night etc.
  - EarlKing 2y ago
    THE DIFFERENCE IS THAT A COPY IS MADE. They broke the law. This isn't that hard to understand. If you don't like the law then either work to change it, create substitute works, or break the law in a way that doesn't involve dragging down the archive with you.
    - dannyobrien 2y ago
      Again, for clarification: this is the archive which contains copies of all those other web pages? Should they have waited to start this archive, which is important enough for you to worry about its future existence, until the law on the right to make copies of websites was settled law? Bearing in mind that there are ongoing lawsuits and discussion on this topic right now, over fifty years since the emergence of the digital networks that rely on making copies to disseminate information. Do you think that there was an open-and-shut case for an online archive in 1996?
    - ruszki 2y ago
      So we should just ignore what was the intention with that law, and stick to the written rules even when it’s stupid in some new environments. Great idea! When you watch anything on Netflix, the movie is copied a few dozens of times at least, and even you make a few copies during watching it, but I don’t think that it’s legal to make a copy, I’m quite sure that it’s stated in their ToS. So the whole internet infrastructure, and computer manufacturer, and every user should be sued with this logic.
pie_flavor 2y ago
The law specifically gives libraries a carveout to make one copy in some cases or three copies in others, for purposes like this. It does not give them the ability to send these copies to library customers over the internet.
- LunaSea 2y ago
  That is exactly what libraries do though by giving access to fully scanned books on their website.

That is incorrect. Libraries regularly scan and OCR books to make them digitally accessible and searchable. I hope the likes of the Library of Congress are ready to shutdown their online services.

EarlKing 2y ago

Digitally accessible and searchable on site, not on line... unless you're saying the Library of Congress makes *in copyright* works available on line to all comers?

codedokode 2y ago
What is the difference between lending a book in the library building and over the Internet from the library website? Lending over Internet is better because it saves the user from transportation cost, allows to read books at night etc.
- EarlKing 2y ago
  THE DIFFERENCE IS THAT A COPY IS MADE. They broke the law. This isn't that hard to understand. If you don't like the law then either work to change it, create substitute works, or break the law in a way that doesn't involve dragging down the archive with you.
  - dannyobrien 2y ago
    Again, for clarification: this is the archive which contains copies of all those other web pages? Should they have waited to start this archive, which is important enough for you to worry about its future existence, until the law on the right to make copies of websites was settled law? Bearing in mind that there are ongoing lawsuits and discussion on this topic right now, over fifty years since the emergence of the digital networks that rely on making copies to disseminate information. Do you think that there was an open-and-shut case for an online archive in 1996?
  - ruszki 2y ago
    So we should just ignore what was the intention with that law, and stick to the written rules even when it’s stupid in some new environments. Great idea! When you watch anything on Netflix, the movie is copied a few dozens of times at least, and even you make a few copies during watching it, but I don’t think that it’s legal to make a copy, I’m quite sure that it’s stated in their ToS. So the whole internet infrastructure, and computer manufacturer, and every user should be sued with this logic.

pie_flavor 2y ago

The law specifically gives libraries a carveout to make one copy in some cases or three copies in others, for purposes like this. It does not give them the ability to send these copies to library customers over the internet.

LunaSea 2y ago
That is exactly what libraries do though by giving access to fully scanned books on their website.