• Please review our updated Terms and Rules here

internet archive lose hachette appeal

This is bad, no doubt - but IA isn't going away, right? Just the book lending part.
 
Not for now at least - the only data that's truly safe is that which you have on your own local storage. (and even that's subject to hardware failure).
 
3lectr1c said:
This is bad, no doubt - but IA isn't going away, right? Just the book lending part.
Click to expand...
The listed penalty was $400 million. IA's revenue according to Propublica's extracts from Form 990 was close to $40 million per year for several years. That includes both Internet Archive and Internet Archive US. The math is not favorable.
 
krebizfan said:
The listed penalty was $400 million. IA's revenue according to Propublica's extracts from Form 990 was close to $40 million per year for several years. That includes both Internet Archive and Internet Archive US. The math is not favorable.
Click to expand...
i believe the $400 million is related to a separate lawsuit from some music industry creeps but yeah... not a good time for human knowledge
 
Yup. NEVER SEND YOUR STUFF TO A LIBRARY OR A MUSEUM. These places are simply nice locations where everything can go to be destroyed.

Keep local copies of everything, sad but there it is. Hopefully bitsavers and the like are not next.....

(Or just run the archive out of Russia or some other country that ignores copyright. That's an option but not an optimal one)
 
There are about a dozen mirrors of bitsavers so it should be alright.
I have my website backed up to archive.org, but, well, you know...
I also keep many local backups and anyone can download their own backup if they want to (hopefully that's enough).
I've got everything I've uploaded to archive.org saved locally so my own stuff will be fine if something were to happen, but I can't say the same about the petabytes of other useful content there :(
 
3lectr1c said:
There are about a dozen mirrors of bitsavers so it should be alright.
I have my website backed up to archive.org, but, well, you know...
I also keep many local backups and anyone can download their own backup if they want to (hopefully that's enough).
I've got everything I've uploaded to archive.org saved locally so my own stuff will be fine if something were to happen, but I can't say the same about the petabytes of other useful content there :(
Click to expand...
yep, i have mirrors of bitsavers, hobbes before it went down, strobe data's website, DECUS-SIG tapes, and some non-retrocmp stuff like all the counter strike videos from gotfrag's youtube channels and around 240GB worth of counter strike 1.6 demos 😅
 
czunit said:
Yup. NEVER SEND YOUR STUFF TO A LIBRARY OR A MUSEUM. These places are simply nice locations where everything can go to be destroyed.

Keep local copies of everything, sad but there it is. Hopefully bitsavers and the like are not next.....

(Or just run the archive out of Russia or some other country that ignores copyright. That's an option but not an optimal one)
Click to expand...
On the contrary, if its software, scanned documentation or other files send it to as many places as will take. Of course keep a local copy as well.
No where is safe. The number of times I see folks saying "I lost precious photos of my late <any close relative> when my phone died is horrendous.
If they are important get them in as many places as you can, google drive, one drive, drop box, icloud, NAS Box......

... what about "loss of privacy" well given the current state of AI, it seems like if they can find your face any where they can make any video they want about you.....
 
It's a shame about the book lending. There were a few i borrowed. I had kinda hoped this could provide a library to the world. Access to physical library's must have declined. The internet/amazon drives this. TBH a second-hand tablet for 40 money units, that allows access to billions of books, instead of a few thousand, is better in many ways. Even in very poor areas in Africa you can get a phone, a library may be a long way away.
 
Probably not the most popular opinion, but the Internet Archive should simply continue to be what it originally was: an archive of long-gone and old internet sites and mirroring the files they once hosted. Why on earth did they even thought it would be a good idea to scan books and "lend" them to people, despite not having any permission to do so? I am actually glad they lost this case, as it helps them to understand what they are and what they are not.
 
Timo W. said:
Probably not the most popular opinion, but the Internet Archive should simply continue to be what it originally was: an archive of long-gone and old internet sites and mirroring the files they once hosted. Why on earth did they even thought it would be a good idea to scan books and "lend" them to people, despite not having any permission to do so? I am actually glad they lost this case, as it helps them to understand what they are and what they are not.
Click to expand...
the people in power will continue to twist and pervert copyright and intellectual privacy law to prevent information sharing and they'll do it on the backs of arguments just like this, so i really don't care a whole lot about who does and doesn't have permission to do what

as vintage computer hobbyists we should know this just as well as anyone, how about those heathkit manuals?
 
Anna's Archive...

en.wikipedia.org

Anna's Archive - Wikipedia

en.wikipedia.org en.wikipedia.org

And you can download their entire store... though it's pretty big...

It's terribly sad what happened to IA. The EFF should have been challening copyright long ago - It's long been a warped system intended to keep road-toll barrens wealthy forever. Copyright needs reform more badly than the patent system.
 
cj7hawk said:
It's terribly sad what happened to IA. The EFF should have been challening copyright long ago - It's long been a warped system intended to keep road-toll barrens wealthy forever. Copyright needs reform more badly than the patent system.
Click to expand...
exactly this, copyright law is anti-consumer and anti-knowledge, i refuse to play fair when the game is rigged against me and so should you
 
Timo W. said:
Why on earth did they even thought it would be a good idea to scan books and "lend" them to people, despite not having any permission to do so?
Click to expand...
Because traditional libraries don't need "permission" to lend physical books (or CDs, DVDs, etc). If IA owns a physical copy of the book, they should be able to lend it remotely to one person at a time. But the line between "lending" and "copying" gets blurry in the digital domain.
 
Plasma said:
Because traditional libraries don't need "permission" to lend physical books (or CDs, DVDs, etc). If IA owns a physical copy of the book, they should be able to lend it remotely to one person at a time. But the line between "lending" and "copying" gets blurry in the digital domain.
Click to expand...
Yes, that is the issue in a nutshell. Technically, the lending and copying has been around for many years, but digital coping has replaced the 'xerox'. It is a complicated issue, but I agree with you....if they purchased a book, they should be able to lone it out, one person at a time.

The other side of the story is that...who wants to write books that make very little money because there are so many free copies around? We may see a 'new' way of doing things that still allows for writers and readers to succeed.

The third side is the big established publishers....I will leave that alone, by choice [please don't assume my position on that].
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top