• Flying Squid@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      2
      arrow-down
      3
      ·
      6 months ago

      What I’m hearing you say is that the Internet Archive needs to figure out some underhanded way of making themselves ridiculously profitable and then stop being a non-profit. It worked out quite well for OpenAI after all.

  • Flying Squid@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    27
    ·
    6 months ago

    As much as this sucks, it could have been so much worse. The Internet Archive stays up. It’s important archives of things like industrial and educational films stay up. The Wayback Machine stays up.

    So as disappointing as this is, I do have some relief because I thought it could mean the end.

    • jeffw@lemmy.worldOPM
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      11
      ·
      6 months ago

      So much of that stuff is public domain material, at least the older stuff like those films and some of the books

      • Flying Squid@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        12
        ·
        6 months ago

        Right, but my worry was that if the IA went down, no one would be archiving it that didn’t have a commercial interest.

        A large amount of the Prelinger Archives have been uploaded to YouTube. Which is great as a backup, but the IA is a noncommercial entity. I do not want for-profits controlling such archives. I’m glad that’s not a worry, at least not for now.

    • Knock_Knock_Lemmy_In@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      4
      arrow-down
      1
      ·
      edit-2
      6 months ago

      Take a step back. Is it really understandable? A digital resource, that costs nothing to reproduce, is being artificially restricted.

      • Nurse_Robot@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        1
        arrow-down
        1
        ·
        6 months ago

        The economy is based on goods and services being exchanged for money. A book is a good that took time and resources to create. A publisher invested into that good with the intent to make a profit, and having it available online for free without their consent circumvents that.

        I’m not saying it’s ethical or that I agree with it, I’m just saying it makes sense.

        • Knock_Knock_Lemmy_In@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          3
          ·
          6 months ago

          having it available online for free without their consent circumvents that.

          In this particular case the publishers are trying to double dip

          Controlled Digital Lending is the library practice whereby a library owns a book, digitizes it, and loans either the physical book or the digital copy to one user at a time.

  • CheeseNoodle@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    11
    ·
    6 months ago

    Publishers proceed not to buffalo buffalo buffalo sell half the books taken down anyway and eventually erase their own backups.

  • Gerudo@lemm.ee
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    7
    ·
    6 months ago

    So is there some kind of backup? Something that can be put back online after the apocalypse or something?

  • Nimo@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    1
    ·
    6 months ago

    Lamentable but copyright is a critical mechanism for protecting the rights of creators.