The legal ruling against the Internet Archive has come down in favour of the rights of authors.

I think we need to start caring about how laws affect the preservation of data, this is ridiculous.

I wonder if you would feel that way if you were one of the artists whose copyrighted media was distributed illegally?

You realize this is about books right? This is about free and easy access to books. Like a digital library. Don’t be ridiculous.

And what do you do for a living? I would like to access that free as well…

I’m a dev, and on occasion I like to contribute to FOSS apps. That backfired on you didn’t it?

Yeah, you have completely changed my mind here. I am uploading all my work to github and all my pics as we speak for everyone to use as they please. Give me a break. Are you really that childish in person, or is it just the screen and keyboard giving you this false machismo?

I’m not being childish, you’re being ridiculous. This is a library, this is a concept that already exists. You’re thinking too profit oriented, not everything has to be for profit. This is so that people have access to these things now and for generations to come. Copyright laws compromising the internet archive will mean loss of data over the next few generations. There is already so much lost media from the internet era, and so little is being done about it, aside from the awesome efforts of the internet archive.

This isn’t about profits this is about preserving data from our era.

There’s more to this argument but it’s already been said in this thread and I don’t feel like typing it out, and I doubt you’d change your mind anyway.

you are taking this to the extreme without considering what you are saying. it is true that authors should be rewarded for their efforts to produce a piece of writting or art. however, sometimes some authors and publishers choose to hide this content, which may be useful when accessible by the larger community. imagine if certain inventions were not made public by their inventors. the entire race would still be living in the stone age.

I’m also a dev. I do upload my work other than my day job work since it’s my employers copyright not mine. You can check out my GitHub which is the same as my username here.

Regardless though, libraries have existed for decades in the real world - but suddenly in a digital form it’s some unimaginable and unforgivable thing? Give me a break.

You might not familiar with how the internet archive does the book lending. The book is actually drm-protected and can only be opened with adobe software, which will expire in just a few days, rendering the file useless. What the internet archive did was simply allowing more people to borrow the same book during pandemic instead of only allowing one person at a time. The lent books still expire after a few days. It’s not like the internet archive was suddenly turn into LibGen and distributing unlocked pdf to anyone. Anyone who familiar with LibGen would not bother borrowing from the internet archive digital library. The issue is simply blown up out of proportion by publishers.

I write software. I am legally bound to not release source code for the things I do for work.

However all of the software that I write that is not required to be closed source, is not.

I always make sure all my work are freely avaliable on the internet, even when I have to pay to do so.

Same here. Every project I have ever worked on is available on github. Even my job open sources its tools.

I just checked out your github. Your python “age guesser” repo and “name guesser” repo are top notch. Your unfinished “street address guesser” looks promising. The internet is thrilled for these three contributions

The problem is that copyright last way to fucking long and they keep extending it. It should be the same as patents… 15 years I think. I’m just going to keep xdcc get whatever I want until they fix it.

Well the average career is 30 years. So you think that if I was to start a photography business that at the end of my 30 year run, half of my career should be publicly available? That means that people could use half of my life’s work without owing me any compensation? Copyright protects a lot of small creators, not just Disney and the likes.

Good thing you’re covered for 70 years after you’re dead then

but if your work is good enough and better than your competitors it shouldn’t be a problem. that’s how the free market works right?

the problem here is capitalists want it both ways. they want to be able litigate any competition into oblivion… but hey, it s just business.

Way to sweepingly generalize something. I had to use copyright laws when I was a pro track photographer. I found out that one of the drivers owned a printing shop. He was telling people to purchase one photo from me at my price and then turning around, scanning it in, and re-printing them for the customers at a lower price. Same exact work, so you can’t argue about the quality. This fuck was also taking my images and using them in advertising which was also a copyright violation. This isn’t about who took the better picture as I was the person behind the camera. It’s about protecting work, that in my case involved time and actual sweat each and every weekend I was out in the sun. But it seems the majority of people in this thread think that he was justified in stealing MY work.

Do people buy your photos decades after you take them? No?

So reasonable copyright terms like 10 or 15 years should be totally fine with you. Unless you are just emotional about it and ranting online.

When working at a print shop, we checked for copyright coverage all the time, and even refused orders over it. Watermarking the corner of your images is a good start. You can also make sure your web images are low resolution to prevent reprinting. 300ppi (pixels per inch) at scale is required for printing. Though the real kicker is, YOU are responsible for protecting your copyright, and you probably should have hired a lawyer.

I think you gotta keep it mind that, like reddit, a majority of the people here should be assumed to be teens or so.

Hey, just here to let you know that I 100% agree with you. You’re being attacked for no reason.

I think you should get paid for working, not for doing nothing due to work you did in the past. You know, like everyone else.

So if you release a movie that took you 5 years to make, you only get paid on the day it is released. Not the next day, because you should not get paid for doing nothing due to work you did in the past. Keep working. Gotcha.

Yes, absolutely. If it takes me a year to make a high-quality table, then I shouldn’t keep getting paid for the table for the rest of my life + 70 years + whatever new extension Disney comes up with.

Thats how it works for patents, medicines, etc…

When someone build a home… There is not even any time at all… You get paid once and then you can forget your past work.

What percentage of your money would come from 15 year old content you produced? Please reply with the median.

I agree, but the internet archive doesn’t have the authority to roll the duration back right? So it was illegal. We all agree the law needs to change, but it is still the law currently.

Sometimes laws need to b broken to bring changes.

How about we implement UBI so we can stop pretending this is a good argument? Copyright is a blight on society.

As a writer I would be fine with this.

Well for one, piracy often helps artists by getting their media in the hands of more people, hence more exposure

Okay on some level I agree with you, but “paying with exposure” is bullshit. If I like something I’ll pay for it after the fact

Let me guess if you have read the thing you are making comments about.

What would you say are my odds?

100000:1?

Also as if the artist are actually paid much of anything by the publishers. Focus on the actual problem next time

The root problem is greed, full stop. Where to begin on that one?

They only issue here is that they stopped following the “one book one rental” rule. You’re allowed to “rent” out a digital copy but only if you have a physical version of the book not lent out. They stopped doing that during covid

I believe even “one book one rental” was kind of a gray area. Publishers probably didn’t sue at the time as the potential ruling was less certain, and they didn’t want a precedent not in their favour.

Libraries have been doing it for ages, this isn’t hugely different

Well then we should donate books to the Archive. Then in the interests of efficiency and cutting down on storage and transportation costs. I volunteer my home to store my newly donated books. If I ever need them back, I will request them.

News from around the world!

Rules:

Please only post links to actual news sources, no tabloid sites, etc
No NSFW content
No hate speech, bigotry, propaganda, etc

Internet Archive's digital library has been found in breach of copyright. The decision has some important implications(theconversation.com)

World News

!worldnews@lemmy.ml

Rules:

Community stats

Community moderators