• FaceDeer@fedia.io
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    21
    arrow-down
    29
    ·
    1 month ago

    The lawsuit was about them distributing unauthorized copies of books. Not archiving, and not internet pages or files.

    And that was exactly the problem.

    • TigrisMorte@kbin.social
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      20
      arrow-down
      4
      ·
      1 month ago

      Your calling files, book documents to be specific, books, doesn’t change that IA is storing files, ebooks to be specific, nor that the ruling shall affect all Libraries, which includes the Internet Archive to be specific. And the actual issue, is that the publishers refuse to offer ebooks to Libraries as they assume it’ll cost sales when in fact the folks using the Library are there as they are not going to go buy one.

      • FaceDeer@fedia.io
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        14
        arrow-down
        9
        ·
        1 month ago

        doesn’t change that IA is storing files, ebooks to be specific,

        Emphasis added. Storing files is not the problem. Nobody cared when they were just scanning and storing them. The problem arose when they started giving out copies. And worse, giving out copies without restriction - libaries “lend” ebooks by using DRM systems to try to ensure that only a specific number of copies are out “in circulation” at any given time, and so the big publishers have turned a blind eye to that.

        Internet Archive basically turned themselves into an ebook Pirate Bay, giving out as many copies as were asked for with no limits.

        Again, I don’t agree with current copyright laws, I think the big publishers are gigantic heaps of slime and should be burned to the ground. The problem here is that it’s not Internet Archive that should be fighting this fight.

          • FaceDeer@fedia.io
            link
            fedilink
            arrow-up
            4
            arrow-down
            6
            ·
            30 days ago

            Unlimited copies, look it up. Internet Archive’s “emergency library” broke the customary limits that other libraries stick to in order to keep publishers off their backs - they were giving out as many copies of a book at once as people were requesting, rather than keeping a limited number “in circulation.”

            It really was basically just a piracy site all of a sudden. It’s absolutely no surprise at all that the publishers came down on them like a ton of bricks.

        • المنطقة عكف عفريت@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          3
          arrow-down
          2
          ·
          edit-2
          30 days ago

          Emphasis added. Storing files is not the problem. Nobody cared when they were just scanning and storing them. The problem arose when they started giving out copies. And worse, giving out copies without restriction - libaries “lend” ebooks by using DRM systems to try to ensure that only a specific number of copies are out “in circulation” at any given time, and so the big publishers have turned a blind eye to that.

          But libraries do not do that to limit access… (I think, unless there is some kind of copyright law making it necessary to restrict access). Don’t they do do that because they have a limited number of book copies that they need to maintain to meet the book lending demands in their area? Seems to me like they are just trying ro maximise people’s access to books given the constraints. Any digital library can obviously do this much faster.