this post was submitted on 21 Jun 2024
183 points (100.0% liked)

Technology

1383 readers
283 users here now

Which posts fit here?

Anything that is at least tangentially connected to the technology, social media platforms, informational technologies and tech policy.

Rules

1. English onlyTitle and associated content has to be in English.
2. Use original linkPost URL should be the original link to the article (even if paywalled) and archived copies left in the body. It allows avoiding duplicate posts when cross-posting.
3. Respectful communicationAll communication has to be respectful of differing opinions, viewpoints, and experiences.
4. InclusivityEveryone is welcome here regardless of age, body size, visible or invisible disability, ethnicity, sex characteristics, gender identity and expression, education, socio-economic status, nationality, personal appearance, race, caste, color, religion, or sexual identity and orientation.
5. Ad hominem attacksAny kind of personal attacks are expressly forbidden. If you can't argue your position without attacking a person's character, you already lost the argument.
6. Off-topic tangentsStay on topic. Keep it relevant.
7. Instance rules may applyIf something is not covered by community rules, but are against lemmy.zip instance rules, they will be enforced.

Companion communities

!globalnews@lemmy.zip
!interestingshare@lemmy.zip

Icon attribution | Banner attribution

founded 1 year ago
MODERATORS
BrikoX@lemmy.zip
183
500,000 Books Have Been Deleted From The Internet Archive’s Lending Library (www.techdirt.com)
submitted 5 months ago by BrikoX@lemmy.zip to c/technology@lemmy.zip
20 comments fedilink hide all child comments
 

If you found out that 500,000 books had been removed from your local public library, at the demands of big publishers who refused to let them buy and lend new copies, and were further suing the library for damages, wouldn’t you think that would be a major news story? Wouldn’t you think many people would be up in arms about it?

you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[–] possiblylinux127@lemmy.zip -4 points 4 months ago (1 children)

They literally poked the bear. They had a copyright exception for the Wayback machine. Apparently they though it would be a good idea to put everything in danger by illegally sharing books. They say they should be exempt because they are a library but all libraries are still required to follow the law.

[–] Kecessa@sh.itjust.works 3 points 4 months ago (1 children)

They shared them the exact same way regular libraries do it.

[–] possiblylinux127@lemmy.zip 2 points 4 months ago (1 children)

They didn't though

That's why they are getting sued.

[–] Kecessa@sh.itjust.works 0 points 4 months ago* (last edited 4 months ago) (1 children)

As we’ve discussed at great length, the Internet Archive’s Open Library system is indistinguishable from the economics of how a regular library works. The Archive either purchases physical books or has them donated (just like a physical library). It then lends them out on a one-to-one basis (leaving aside a brief moment where it took down that barrier when basically all libraries were shut down due to pandemic lockdowns), such that when someone “borrows” a digital copy of a book, no one else can borrow that same copy.

The decision opens the door to doing the same thing to any library that offers digital copies of the books they own.

[–] possiblylinux127@lemmy.zip 1 points 4 months ago* (last edited 4 months ago) (1 children)

leaving aside a brief moment where it took down that barrier

That was the problem that started this mess. They aren't even willing to admit that was the cause. If they would have admitted wrong doing off the bat and looked to settle the book publishers may of just left them alone. The problem is they can't see past there own nose