3 ms·

It's a thankless job to be always begging for donations to keep something working when the Internet at large doesn't value it as much as it should. And now gett

It's a thankless job to be always begging for donations to keep something working when the Internet at large doesn't value it as much as it should. And now getting targeted like that? I wouldn't judge them if this is an official communication coming from exhausted and frustrated staff.

appendix-rock 2y ago
Just a reminder that AI tried pivoting to much more clear-cut legitimate piracy, presumably because they got bored or something, and certainly put ‘donations’ toward that effort. IA is an incredibly valuable resource, but let’s not put them on a pedestal.
- colinsane 2y ago
  heh, if they went 100% "we're operating our service from international waters and won't be taking any DMCA requests" i would donate $1000 on the spot (anonymously, of course, but entirely serious).
- Nemo_bis 2y ago
  What's "legitimate piracy"? As a reminder, the scheme was designed to work exactly like typical lending libraries. Publishers were unable to show any harm, and the only evidence available proved they actually benefited from better sales thanks to the Internet Archive. Authors were clearly benefited. https://www.techdirt.com/2024/09/05/second-circuit-says-libraries-disincentivize-authors-to-write-books-by-lending-them-for-free/ https://www.techdirt.com/2024/09/05/second-circuit-says-libr... But I agree, no need to put them on a pedestal. Nobody is perfect.
  - dewey 2y ago
    > As a reminder, the scheme was designed to work exactly like typical lending libraries. Wasn't the issue precisely that they removed that limitation and then never added it again?
    - Nemo_bis 2y ago
      Not really. I couldn't locate anywhere in the ruling an indication that the number of copies borrowed at any one time was a factor in the decision.
      - dewey 2y ago
        That's unfortunately exactly what happened though: > He unveiled the National Emergency Library, a vast trove of digital books mostly unavailable elsewhere, and made access to it a breeze. This good deed backfired spectacularly. Four publishers claimed “willful mass copyright infringement” and sued. They won. On Friday, the publishers said through their trade association that they had negotiated a deal with the archive that would remove all their copyright books from the site. Source: https://archive.ph/tFMY1#selection-841.212-853.182 https://archive.ph/tFMY1#selection-841.212-853.182 And here's the announcement from Archive.org when they rolled out this feature: https://archive.ph/vGoMq https://archive.ph/vGoMq
        Nemo_bis 2y ago
        There is no evidence that, under the NEL, more digital copies of books were borrowed than physical copies were (un)available in the closed libraries. I've not re-read all the materials from the lower court recently, but IIRC publishers didn't even bother to argue this point. Did you find any place where the judge relied on this?
        dewey 2y ago
        > Both sides filed motions for summary judgment. Judge John G. Koeltl ruled on March 24, 2023, saying the National Emergency Library concept was not fair use, thus the Archive infringed copyright by lending full ebook copies without the waitlist restriction. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hachette_v._Internet_Archive https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hachette_v._Internet_Archive
        Nemo_bis 2y ago

appendix-rock 2y ago

Just a reminder that AI tried pivoting to much more clear-cut legitimate piracy, presumably because they got bored or something, and certainly put ‘donations’ toward that effort. IA is an incredibly valuable resource, but let’s not put them on a pedestal.

colinsane 2y ago
heh, if they went 100% "we're operating our service from international waters and won't be taking any DMCA requests" i would donate $1000 on the spot (anonymously, of course, but entirely serious).
Nemo_bis 2y ago
What's "legitimate piracy"? As a reminder, the scheme was designed to work exactly like typical lending libraries. Publishers were unable to show any harm, and the only evidence available proved they actually benefited from better sales thanks to the Internet Archive. Authors were clearly benefited. https://www.techdirt.com/2024/09/05/second-circuit-says-libraries-disincentivize-authors-to-write-books-by-lending-them-for-free/ https://www.techdirt.com/2024/09/05/second-circuit-says-libr... But I agree, no need to put them on a pedestal. Nobody is perfect.
- dewey 2y ago
  > As a reminder, the scheme was designed to work exactly like typical lending libraries. Wasn't the issue precisely that they removed that limitation and then never added it again?
  - Nemo_bis 2y ago
    Not really. I couldn't locate anywhere in the ruling an indication that the number of copies borrowed at any one time was a factor in the decision.
    - dewey 2y ago
      That's unfortunately exactly what happened though: > He unveiled the National Emergency Library, a vast trove of digital books mostly unavailable elsewhere, and made access to it a breeze. This good deed backfired spectacularly. Four publishers claimed “willful mass copyright infringement” and sued. They won. On Friday, the publishers said through their trade association that they had negotiated a deal with the archive that would remove all their copyright books from the site. Source: https://archive.ph/tFMY1#selection-841.212-853.182 https://archive.ph/tFMY1#selection-841.212-853.182 And here's the announcement from Archive.org when they rolled out this feature: https://archive.ph/vGoMq https://archive.ph/vGoMq
      - Nemo_bis 2y ago
        There is no evidence that, under the NEL, more digital copies of books were borrowed than physical copies were (un)available in the closed libraries. I've not re-read all the materials from the lower court recently, but IIRC publishers didn't even bother to argue this point. Did you find any place where the judge relied on this?
        dewey 2y ago
        > Both sides filed motions for summary judgment. Judge John G. Koeltl ruled on March 24, 2023, saying the National Emergency Library concept was not fair use, thus the Archive infringed copyright by lending full ebook copies without the waitlist restriction. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hachette_v._Internet_Archive https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hachette_v._Internet_Archive
        Nemo_bis 2y ago