Can mfs stop attacking the internet archive im so tired of this shit
this post was submitted on 12 Aug 2023
187 points (99.0% liked)
datahoarder
6728 readers
46 users here now
Who are we?
We are digital librarians. Among us are represented the various reasons to keep data -- legal requirements, competitive requirements, uncertainty of permanence of cloud services, distaste for transmitting your data externally (e.g. government or corporate espionage), cultural and familial archivists, internet collapse preppers, and people who do it themselves so they're sure it's done right. Everyone has their reasons for curating the data they have decided to keep (either forever or For A Damn Long Time). Along the way we have sought out like-minded individuals to exchange strategies, war stories, and cautionary tales of failures.
We are one. We are legion. And we're trying really hard not to forget.
-- 5-4-3-2-1-bang from this thread
founded 4 years ago
MODERATORS
I'd suppose owners/main team would be annoyed AF as well.
Those companies are such a drag for human society because they are afraid of their bottom line. the Music Industry and Amazon also would have burned down the Library of Alexandria if they had deemed it worrisome to their profit.
And theres still no proof that every download truly is a lost sale. It's all just make believe.
The Internet is rapidly being ground down by all these companies.
And it sucks because the Internet is meant to be for everyone or at least that is what AJ from Fairy Odd parents said!
These records should have been in the public domain many years ago. Copyright law needs a thorough reform
But there is no money in that, please, think of the corporations! /s
This is the best summary I could come up with:
The labels' lawsuit filed in a federal court in Manhattan said the Archive's "Great 78 Project" functions as an "illegal record store" for songs by musicians including Frank Sinatra, Ella Fitzgerald, Miles Davis and Billie Holiday.
Representatives for the Internet Archive did not immediately respond to a request for comment on the complaint.
The Internet Archive is already facing another federal lawsuit in Manhattan from leading book publishers who said its digital-book lending program launched in the pandemic violates their copyrights.
A judge ruled for the publishers in March, in a decision that the Archive plans to appeal.
The labels' lawsuit said the project includes thousands of their copyright-protected recordings, including Bing Crosby's "White Christmas," Chuck Berry's "Roll Over Beethoven" and Duke Ellington's "It Don't Mean a Thing (If It Ain't Got That Swing)".
The lawsuit said the recordings are all available on authorized streaming services and "face no danger of being lost, forgotten, or destroyed."
I'm a bot and I'm open source!
*logs onto Soulseek instead*
We don't talk about Soulseek
And once again it's due to Internet Archive going beyond its mandate to be an archive of the internet, and instead trying to become a more blatant form of Pirate Bay.
I really hate these litigious publishers and copyright has gone way too far, but this is not be the fight that Internet Archive should be picking. It's going to get itself destroyed and take a vast quantity of irreplaceable data long with it.
I see the copyright holder of a book asking them to take it down from years ago. No response from internet archive. Feel sorry for the guy and I stopped donating to internet archive since then.
You’re absolutely right. Archive.org don’t need to fight this fight.
Just wondering, but if you digitize 78-RPM records, what is the actual difference between them and the digital copies existing on other websites? Just that they're the original recorded copies?
They probably sound slightly differently, and have more historical value to them. I just digitized my grandfathers cassette collection, because it was his, and are a different experience (because of how cassettes sound).