The Internet Archive should seriously consider moving outside US juristiction.
irc, it's already backed up to multiple other countries. I assume this isn't some crazy idea, and they've considered this themselves.
Donate to help their defense, or donate to help them move their infrastructure. I think they need money more than they need big brain ideas.
They need to operate out of a different country that respects human knowledge even at the expense of corporations' profits. What exactly that country is, I have no clue.
But yeah. In the short term, moving out of a fascist country to basically anywhere else is a good idea for them.
None, lol. But there are some who don't give a shit about copyright because it benefits them
thank you so much, you're doing god's work
No No. It's man's work. Responsibility must not be shifted
lol i know it was just a saying
Please move out of USA where trolls are more prevalent
Guys PLEASE PLEASE PLEASE, download it all. The only way to preserve information is to copy it until 1 survives
I am just a poor fucking Iranian with shitass internet and no money to buy a NAS but I'll try to hawk some part of it as much as I can
Is there a coordinated way to mirror it, like Anna's Archive is doing with their torrents? I'd be happy to pitch in a few terrabytes
willing to bet that the ia does a million more for artists than the record labels ever did
I mean, the american idiotic narrative of outraise, outspend, outcapitalist can get bent. when you're faced with such an immense force of vast resources, you don't raise a similar sized force and roll the dice on the outcome - you engage in asymetric warfare.
disperse all that shit in P2P networks with multiple redundancies with no single point of failure. who are they gonna sue, the i2p stack or whatever? fuck those fuckers.
I'd finance something like that with my meager resources, instead of filling some coffers to finance lawyers and whatnot.
There must be a lot of complicated aspects to this that I don't understand.
The right course of action seems obvious to me...
Firstly spin out a separate organisation to manage the wayback machine. It shouldn't be part of the pot defending against litigation like this.
Secondly, and I feel silly saying this but... don't institutionalise the perpetration of rights violations? In the age of distributed databases and the dark web and the block chain and federation surely we can figure out a way to archive media that doesn't put people or organisations at risk of litigation.
Finally, if the individuals involved with IA are not liable for the debts of IA then the organisation should fold because that's practically free compared to defending against these litigious assholes.
The reason this is as public as it is is because an archive like this is more useful the more is archived. If you manage it in an entirely hidden way, you basically won't get it accessible from the clearnet and are relegated to keep it on Tor or similar. And once you do that, a lot less people will use it and thus it'll be a lot less useful.
Also, they are not only fighting for an archive to exist, they're fighting for it being a societally acceptable thing to exist.
In the age of distributed databases and the dark web and the block chain and federation surely we can figure out a way to archive media that doesn’t put people or organisations at risk of litigation
That limits and gatekeeps access to an enormous degree. The IA wants to be useful to everyone, not just the tiny fraction of the world population savvy enough to use the internet for more than opening a browser and a chat client.
don’t institutionalise the perpetration of rights violations?
Counterpoint: The perpetration of this kind of rights violation precisely needs to be normalized to the point of meaninglessness. Intellectual property can either go away top-down (which considering the way things went over the past century is never going to happen) or it can go away bottom up - it has to be flaunted and disregarded by everybody via continued large-scale disobedience.
Or, of course, it could just never go away.
That limits and gatekeeps access
Not necessarily, I wasn't really proposing to just torrent everything. I was kinda dreaming of a more creative solution that trivialises access while abstracts the actual hosting away from individuals.
this kind of rights violation precisely needs to be normalized
Perhaps, but if so this just isn't the way to achieve that. IA doesn't seem sustainable.
My Internet archive T-shirt just came in the mail.
and they accept donations in crypto 👍
I have a question. Would it be better for me to donate money to the Internet Archive, or would it be more beneficial long term to purchase a NAS and torrent as much stuff from TIA that I can?
why not both? small donations to the IA pile up. also the IA has several petabytes of data so it would be difficult to mirror that completely but sharing parts you're interested in (even on the small scale) can be immensely useful.
I think that's a good idea. I'm planning on cancelling my $3/month discord subscription so money can go twords TIA instead
I have about a spare laptop I can setup to be a seeder in the closet or sthm
Can Internet Archive just stop copyright violations?
Do not get me wrong, I am all for piracy, but usually pirate websites hide themself (like libgen, for example), so that no lawsuit possesses a threat to the resource itself or resource owners.
IA, on the other hand, are pretentious pirates. They either believe that they are untouchable or just do not care in general. And when it causes expected result once again, they start running around asking for help and telling how dangerous it is for their entire work.
IA, on the other hand, are pretentious pirates.
Homie, the IA is an archive. Their first and foremost aim is to make culture and knowledge available to the masses. You should read the blog entry. It's not like they're distributing the latest Marvel slop.
They lost that argument when they implemented the possibility to play games they host in the browser.
I'm all for an archive. I'm not sure IA are doing this right.
but come on, it's not like they're modern videogames or something, they're old stuff from the 80s and 90s that one would never be able to play without access to the original hardware, so even in that case it's about preserving the media, not committing plain copyright infringement to the original game publisher or something
They acted like a regplar library: only one person was able to play concurrently. If that's not ok, then all libraries should get sued.
The law is a law. Their aims do not override it. They are getting what any sane person would expect. Nothing prevented them from separating their legal and shady operations to separate entities. That, at least, would prevent compromising the whole operation. If someone puts his head in a lion mouth, it is still his fault, at least partially, that lion kills him.
It's not like they're distributing the latest Marvel slop.
I doubt this argument will hold in court.
It's acting like a library. When the current laws and political systems would prevent libraries being invented now, it's a sign that the laws are bullshit. Not that libraries are wrong.
The law can be wrong, and it would be cool if the hard work of others is maintained while that's fixed.
You're still missing the point tho.
You claimed it was piracy. Piracy is not when you go to a library and listen to something the label doesn't sell anymore. Piracy is downloading the latest Imagine Dragons slop without paying.
If the library does not have the license or a right, guaranteed by law, to do that, then it is piracy.
US copyright law has been co-opted by corporations for the exclusive profit of corporate copyright holders. Just because a law exists doesn't mean it is just. Props to the IA for fighting the good fight.
Which law? in which place? at what time ?
Where it's hosted? where it's being accessed? the intermediate locations ?
Which license, is the license enforceable in this context? who decides if it is? what if there are conflicting decisions from different applications of law, who arbitrates?
Do you mean piracy in the maritime sense? or do you mean copyright infringement? perhaps trademark infringement? or intellectual property theft? based on which law in which geographic region ?
This isn't even hyperbole, the things you are talking about have nuance and context, pretending they don't is a failure of imagination or intentional trolling.
It's called property. You buy a book. You don't get to copy it, but you get to show it to anyone you want.
Private property is the smallest unit of warfare.
The law is the law in the very specific contexts in which it applies and is heavily open to interpretation and bias, which is (in theory) why trials and lawsuits exist.
The vast majority of these rpm records are not copyrighted. The same happened before when they were losing lawsuits over the books they archive, the vast majority of them weren't copyrighted and almost none of them were published by the sueing publishers.
This isn't about copyright as they would have you believe, this is about information being publicly accessible rather than controlled by corporations.
1. Posts must be related to the discussion of digital piracy
2. Don't request invites, trade, sell, or self-promote
3. Don't request or link to specific pirated titles, including DMs
4. Don't submit low-quality posts, be entitled, or harass others
📜 c/Piracy Wiki (Community Edition):
FUCK ADOBE!
Torrenting/P2P:
Gaming:
💰 Please help cover server costs.
 |
 |
|---|---|
| Ko-fi | Liberapay |