This morning, we were disappointed to read that four commercial publishers are suing the Internet Archive.
As a library, the Internet Archive acquires books and lends them, as libraries have always done. This supports publishing, authors and readers. Publishers suing libraries for lending books, in this case protected digitized versions, and while schools and libraries are closed, is not in anyone’s interest.
We hope this can be resolved quickly.
Lawfare is being waged on many digital platforms..
Get your seat belt on Brewster, we have a lot of turbulence to go thru before we land.
Thanks again, a Billion Brewster
Pingback: Publishers sue to shut down books-for-all Internet Archive for ‘willful digital piracy on an industrial scale’ - World Tech Valley
Could you please let us know which publishers are suing so we can, you know, act accordingly?
Thanks!
Matt
Hachette Book Group, Inc., Harpercollins Publishers LLC, John Wiley & Sons, Inc., and Penguin Random House LLC are bringing the suit.
So, that’s what, 50% of the English language publishing market? 60?
The law is probably on their side. Morals, not so much.
the law needs to change. the entire theory of it needs revaluation. publishers are among the many kinds of greedy opportunists trying to gain exclusive control over resources that ought to be freely available, and if the law were not a total parody of itself, it would place public interests before private ones. if the law is always furthering injustice, what is its value, and why should anyone respect it? the law is supposed to stand for what’s right. otherwise, it’s just a scam.
no one is profiting financially from these works being made available – they are being provided for the good of everyone. they are digital copies, so they don’t have any impact necessarily on the sale of books. if someone wants a physical book, they’ll buy a physical book, and money will always be made from the selling of books, because unlike digital media, they’re durable, and you can read them by candlelight when you have to. no one is suggesting that authors or publishers shouldn’t profit from their business. but there’s a difference between plying one’s trade, and creating a captive market, which no one should have the right to do. the plaintiffs talk about their “rights” as publishers and authors, meaning the privileges that have hitherto been granted to them by law, without any regard for the natural rights that everyone has to access or copy information in general, which no law can justly prohibit, despite every attempt that has been made to do otherwise. always, we are losing more and more of our freedom. and this is very much a 1st amendment issue.
these are my feelings, anyway. I think the whole issue of copyright needs to be carefully revisited, because there is a powerful case to be made that its very existence is what enables intellectual theft, and that creativity in general is severely hampered by the laws that now exist, depriving the world of more than timely and irreplaceable works, but also crucial inventions, and truth itself. for the most explosive century of human history, it’s as if we’ve been bound, gagged, and blindfolded, and it’s time for this to change.
I consider myself an author as well, so any notion of my being opposed to the creative community is absurd. I just happen to think creativity has far higher and more important purposes to serve than the mere making of money. call me a snob, but there is an awful lot of “stuff” (some might call it trash, but it’s totally relative) that arguably does very little for literature, or art, or culture in general, and that has no other motivation than to sell – and I for one could do with somewhat less of it. but that’s completely beside the point. ars gratia artis: if you don’t believe that, maybe you’re not a real artist.
what internet archive has done here is provide a charitable public service, and these publishers have acted maliciously in their characterization of it as piracy, which more accurately resembles some of their own practices, and in choosing this of all times, when everyone is struggling together, to tighten their grip on the freedom of expression. I would rather see this backfire and blow up in their faces than for internet archive to face any liability whatsoever, and I hope that all its supporters, and believers in free information, will not sit by and allow the corporate media to shape the narrative in this case.
maybe I’m off about some things, reacting with my gut.
but with any luck, this issue could bring us closer to what copyright law should be.
please let us know what we can do to help.
Really hope the IA doesn’t go bankrupt, the total statutory damages appears that it could be lethal for this website and the wayback machine.
Without the internet archive, these things can happen:
-History of dead pages will be wiped. This is especially bad for Wikipedia as they rely on third-party sources on the references section. In order for Wikipedia to be reliable, it’s citations must be live.
-History of any content will be wiped. Software, images, etc. Especially if it’s a content that wasn’t uploaded elsewhere other than the IA.
Which this is an UTTER DISASTER.
I may be biased as a total Internet Archive nut, but as a full-time college professor I have students using these resources while everything is closed, and that includes the college library which does not have digital check outs. We don’t need to make students buy books on Amazon that they just simply need to reference in their essays and would normally just get from a Library for 20 minutes and then put back. As an artist I understand what the authors are thinking, but during this crisis we need to help each other and make our works available, especially to underserved communities. Brewster you are a saint, and me and all my students have your back!!! So sorry it has come to this…what a world.
So, they don’t actually read the books fully? They just get academia points for referencing them?
I don’t think the AUTHORS are thinking anything. I think the publishing houses have PURCHASED THE AUTHORS’ RIGHTS and know are looking to KILL COMPETITION by any means necessary including but not limited to changing the law or suing to bankruptcy.
I don’t think the AUTHORS are thinking anything. I think the publishing houses have PURCHASED THE AUTHORS’ RIGHTS and now are looking to KILL COMPETITION by any means necessary including but not limited to changing the law or suing to bankruptcy.
GREED – I hope this will never affect the Grateful Dead collection.
The complaint is available at
https://www.courtlistener.com/docket/17211300/hachette-book-group-inc-v-internet-archive/
Content warning: contains atrocious rhetoric.
I understand what the authors are thinking, but during this crisis we need to help each other and make our works available, especially to underserved communities. Brewster you are a saint, and me and all my students have your back!!! So sorry it has come to this
In this day and age author earnings are dropping precipitously and piracy is rampant. You may be well heeled enough to get by during these times, but the 25% of Americans who have become recently unemployed, and 80% who were living paycheck to paycheck even before COVID are not.
For the love of God make the survival of the Internet Archive your priority, even if that means discontinuing the National Emergency Library, it’s still worth it if they can bring in billions in copyright infringements damages. An Internet without IA is an internet not worth living, I would definitely completely pull the plug from the Internet without the IA.
I am unfortunately not surprised at the listing of publishers…they are mammoth & ruthless. I also understand things from BOTH points of view here. You are all correct to point out that we NEED these resources during this historical and devastating pandemic which has completely changed the world as we know it. I am FULLY supportive of the resources during “normal” times too—those of us who are poor & disabled cannot always just buy stuff from Amazon or rummage through the library/book store (do they exist anymore?)/used book store. Internet sources, especially FREE ones, are invaluable & change lives. As a photographer, I also understand how hard hit publishing houses have been by the internet, & how “piracy” (not that IA should be categorized as such) has essentially ended any potential career opportunities for many artists out there. But I’ve just learned to roll with it…I figure that the wealth of knowledge of EVERYTHING that I’ve gained from the internet FAR exceeds any income I could ever hope to earn as an artist. So I 100%*** support IA & the extraordinary efforts you have made to make all knowledge available to the WORLD, and I am eternally grateful to your ENTIRE team, board, and volunteers for the countless hours of work you’ve put in for everyone, everywhere—and ME. 🙂 Thank you and if there is ANYTHING *we*, the public, can do to support you (petitions? Letter writing?), please do not hesitate to let us know!!
Could you please let us know which publishers are suing so we can, you know, act accordingly?
Thanks!
P.K
I wonder if some libraries that are closed can temporarily assign ownership or loan their copies of books to the internet archive, thus legally covering some of the lending that took place.
@Brewster Kahle. As a scientist who depends on the IA for research materials, I’m horrified, but I just want to know the worst case scenario so I can be prepared. Do they just want the National Emergency Library of unlimited checkouts be closed? Are they targeting ALL your book-lending operations? Are they trying to sue the entire site into bankruptcy? Are there any contingency plans if you lose the lawsuit, or can’t settle?
I really hope this issue is resolved quickly too. It would be a MAJOR DISASTER if the internet archive goes bankrupt. Digital content saved or uploaded onto the internet archive could be “extinct in the wild”. Meaning that things like software, images, web-pages etc. don’t exist elsewhere and will be gone forever from the internet if the IA was shut down.
Wikipedia’s sources uses the internet archive when a link rot occurs. Without the internet archive (which is the biggest web-archiving tool on the internet), links to dead pages will completely be permanently broken with no backup, which worsens the problem with citation links no longer working.
I’ve emailed to the publishers about this, hopefully I get a reply.
It’s worth noting that most of these books are out of print, so I don’t see how anyone is losing out if I borrow an obscure 1970s novel or a pulp magazine from the 30s, neither of which the publisher has been making any money off of in the first place. If they don’t want people borrowing books, then maybe they should stop keeping them out of print. I would buy them if they were available. More evidence that copyright is broken. Honestly, I believe that it is inherently immoral to keep information unavailable (perhaps a requirement for copyright to be valid could be that the copyrighted material must be kept in print in order to retain its status, but that’s just one millennial’s idealistic fantasies).