Gregory's ServerThe Internet Archive losing its appeal means one thing: pirate stuff. Pirate brazenly. There’s no point trying to do it the nice way - you’ll get shut down anyway. Copy, share, and archive to your heart’s content. It’s the only way we’re keeping digital media and our cultural memory intact.
 106 comments
  @hobbsc @hailey "appeal" in this case is referring to a legal action https://www.theverge.com/2024/9/4/24235958/internet-archive-loses-appeal-ebook-lending @pleaseclap @hobbsc @hailey @PJ_Evans @pleaseclap @hobbsc @hailey Copyright violation is not theft. It is infringement. These are different words (and governed by different laws) for a reason. Stop falling for billionaire lies. @qqmrichter @pleaseclap @hobbsc @hailey @PJ_Evans @pleaseclap @hobbsc @hailey No, you misunderstoon me. I said "stop falling for billionaire lies", not "continue perpetuating billionaire lies". I know the difference is subtle, but see if you can tell them apart. @qqmrichter @PJ_Evans @pleaseclap @hailey there's no need for argument here, y'all. be excellent to each other. @hobbsc @PJ_Evans @pleaseclap @hailey An argument would imply two people who know what they're talking about speaking. One person in this exchange cannot distinguish between "infringement" and "theft" and is unequipped to have an actual argument.  @hobbsc @qqmrichter @PJ_Evans @pleaseclap @hailey It's really funny and sad at the same time how they're constantly trying to appear nonchalant and one-up each other with phrases such as "sweetcheeks" lol @shellheim @hp If I say no then that would be one-upping you, so I am trapped in this loop! You seem to have bested me stranger! AAAAAHHHHH @shellheim The trick is to only imply the one-upping by asking passive-aggressive questions! @PJ_Evans @pleaseclap @hobbsc @hailey Sweetcheeks, see if you can tell me the difference between "infringement" and "theft" and why they are entirely different terms in the legal sphere. (Hint: no you can't, apparently, since you're still babbling nonsense.) @qqmrichter@mastodon.world @pleaseclap @hobbsc @hailey @PJ_Evans @qqmrichter @hobbsc @hailey "the Second Circuit Court of Appeals ruled that permitting the Internet Archive’s digital library would “allow for widescale copying that deprives creators of compensation and diminishes the incentive to produce new works.”" The Court is accurately describing the legal situation. These word choices are specific, limited, and literal. "Theft" is not among them on purpose, because it's not applicable. You're welcome to try telling the Court they're wrong @PJ_Evans hey evans r these boots ur licking yummy? @qqmrichter @pleaseclap @hobbsc @hailey @PJ_Evans @qqmrichter @pleaseclap @hobbsc @hailey rentseeking parasites do not improve anyone’s lives, so I don’t understand why anyone would repeat their nonsensical talking points  @PJ_Evans @pleaseclap @hobbsc @hailey  @eishiya @realn2s @eishiya yeahhh my understanding is it went like this: 1) Internet Archive has rights to X ebooks and operates a digital library to lend them out, limited to X copies lended at a time. 2) COVID hits, IA decides to lend out infinite copies at a time, arbitrarily ignoring the X limit 3) Publishers sue 4) Court agrees with Publishers @realn2s @eishiya there’s a robust discussion on HN, which includes the perspective that what I consider the existing value of the Internet Archive came from fighting similar battles years ago: https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=41449965 I don’t have enough evidence to reject that. All I know is this: 1) the marginal cost of reproducing digital information products (books, movies software) is practically zero 2) the fixed costs of producing them, with quality, remains high. 3) we don’t have good systems for rewarding high-quality production in this regime. For more on this, read Who Owns the Future? by Jaron Lanier.  @PeterBronez As I recall it, your summary is broadly correct *except* for (1) which should be more like "for each book, Internet Archive legally possesses X copies, and operates a digital library to lend them out as ebooks, limited to the corresponding X copies lended at a time". In other words, very close to loaning an item under first sale doctrine, except the intermediate step of digitizing the work and being able to loan it out at a distance. @realn2s @eishiya One of the few "old" internet projects of an internet, which I did not find fully disgusting. And shitheads with a lot of money, power and an army of lawyers are doing their best to shut it down. The older I get, the more of things I found important die. What's next? Wikipedia? Libreoffice? Gnome? KDE? Mozilla already made a nosedive into stupid. @realn2s @pleaseclap @hobbsc @hailey @hailey willing to bet the internet archive losing that battle is followed up with Open AI winning theirs They only care about copyright when it's big owners not small creators   @hailey https://github.com/MiniGlome/Archive.org-Downloader has been hugely beneficial to me. You get FAR higher quality output than the encrypted Adobe PDFs you can decrypt with Calibre tools. I fear what may now be truly lost due to Archive being forced to hide things. At least a lot of books are 1hr rental so they can be downloaded, but who knows what'll disappear now And archive has a looooot of books missing from libgen, z-library, and anna's archive.  Nothing has changed, except that IA's attempt to move fast and break things ended up breaking IA. If you're going to do piracy to keep media intact, you've gotta do a decentralised system because otherwise you're painting a big target on your back.   If you haven't printed a boat https://www.3dbenchy.com can you even say you own a 3D printer?  Buying ideas is not nice, never has been nice. It's as nasty as can be. You're a bad person for giving anyone a single dime over it, especially if you felt like it made you safer, not in danger.
If only there was a way to share files where random goons couldn't pin down your IP address... @hailey "You can pirate to your hearts content with a VPN IP and its cheaper than any streaming service. Until we meet again!" -Skeletor @hailey "copyright" thing is only worth for bigcorps. Remember a time before google IPO, when "do no evil" was at least spelled out by them, they had the "google books" initiative - that was also shutdown, becoming just an useless index, DESPITE having all the books digitized.  @hailey Oh NOW we can do that? Awesome. (slowly and laboriously plugs in and turns on eighty terabytes of storage that has been gathering dust on a shelf prior to this event) @hailey @hailey It's 's not piracy if it belongs in a museum! Then you're just a digital archaeologist! @hailey@hails.org I came to the conclusion that the only ethical consumption was pirated consumption over a decade ago. @hailey "Justice" systems always go against the people, freedom and knowledge sharing. They're a seminal part of the problem Itself. @hailey I hope people follow your advice and rip off as much stuff as they can. SO much of the culture of the past twenty years is in two or three ephemeral places, and no one officially being allowed to archive it means that a bunch of us need to UN-officially archive it.  @hailey https://www.wired.com/story/internet-archive-loses-hachette-books-case-appeal/  @ForiamCJ One of the reasons why I don't pay for ebooks that are DRM-encumbered. Same with music. I'm fine with paying a fair price for things that I enjoy. But if I pay for it, the seller had better give me something I can keep and use *without* relying on the seller, the seller's service, specific software that might not even run a decade from now, etc etc. Non-DRM'd files in standardized formats generally meet that bar. DRM-encumbered files virtually never do.  @hailey  @hailey I have pretty much resigned to: @hailey This was always the only way. Playing nice has never worked anywhere ever under capitalism. If and when we organise ourselves together politically and economically in a better way then we can all be nice together.  @hailey i hear a whisper in the winds of an archive, one from someone named anna, you could even say it was anna's archive, even maybe dot org. i'm not saying you can't find any books you want on it easily, newspapers, comics..., and i'm especially not inviting anyone who has some hard drive space to help hoard it all. by total coincidence there might even be a neat little tool on the website to generate files in need of a torrential new home if only such a project existed  @hailey@hails.org why, how and when did The Internet Archive lose its appeal?  @gocu54 This is not the first time that a megapublisher took a copyright hatchet to an important public service.  @hailey me, seeding torrents for all four seasons of infinity train with no share limit  NO. Backup of websites, books & other media out of copyright & in the public domain, yes - but NOT artists’ / authors’ copyrighted material. That is THEFT. That is taking the food from their mouths & tearing down the roof over their head. There are so many LEGAL ways to get so much, incl the despicably low prices A will sell for; if you can’t find a legal way, MAKE one, such as campaigning for PLR (public lending rights) in your country. NEVER SUPPORT STEALING SOMEONE’S LIVELIHOOD.  @hailey In situations like these, I always think about how many people like to talk of the "social contract", and how that mysteriously only ever gets invoked to place obligations on individuals, and never on states or corporations (as evidenced here once again). Like, people aren't outright pirating because cultural interests are supposed to be balanced by legal exceptions. And leaving aside whether that has ever actually been balanced, if publishers now decide to object to that balance... well. @hailey@hails.org Book publishers are the scum of the earth. I wish all authors just let me send them money directly for their work. Their hostility towards actual preservation via DRM and "purchasing" (actually lending) ebooks online is fucking ridiculous. I haven't bought a book in years now because of shit like this, this is just icing on the cake. |
@hailey