this post was submitted on 05 Jul 2024
280 points (94.9% liked)

Technology

59374 readers
3846 users here now

This is a most excellent place for technology news and articles.


Our Rules


  1. Follow the lemmy.world rules.
  2. Only tech related content.
  3. Be excellent to each another!
  4. Mod approved content bots can post up to 10 articles per day.
  5. Threads asking for personal tech support may be deleted.
  6. Politics threads may be removed.
  7. No memes allowed as posts, OK to post as comments.
  8. Only approved bots from the list below, to ask if your bot can be added please contact us.
  9. Check for duplicates before posting, duplicates may be removed

Approved Bots


founded 1 year ago
MODERATORS
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[–] [email protected] 4 points 4 months ago (1 children)

IA didn't get sued for archiving. They got sued for mass redistribution.

[–] [email protected] -4 points 4 months ago (1 children)

Pretty sure that's a basic function of a publicly operated archive, but for sure there was a lot of nuance.

[–] [email protected] 3 points 4 months ago (1 children)

That's the point, though. The law is very clear that mass distributing wholesale copyrighted works isn't fair use. Digitizing it was the part justified by fair use "archival". Distribution isn't.

You have to start over and throw out the old laws. Right now there's no framework to own a file at all (outside of actually holding the copyright). It's always a license.

[–] [email protected] -4 points 4 months ago (1 children)

Throwing them out and restarting is a lot harder than restarting without throwing them out.

[–] [email protected] 2 points 4 months ago (1 children)

The core concept of ownership and copying needs to change if you want anything resembling what IA did to be protected. Because the underlying premise behind copyright legislation that that any unauthorized copy needs a specific exception to be legal, and it's impossible to use digital files without numerous copies.

That's starting from scratch.

[–] [email protected] -4 points 4 months ago (1 children)

Okay but you can literally just overwrite laws without making a period inbetween where anything and everything is allowed. That's fucking stupid.

[–] [email protected] 2 points 4 months ago* (last edited 4 months ago) (1 children)

Where did anyone say anything that resembles "make a free for all in between" in any way?

The core concepts of current laws are completely incompatible with any form of actual ownership in a digital world. You need to write new laws that start from the ground up with concepts that work.

[–] [email protected] -3 points 4 months ago (1 children)

You have to start over and throw out the old laws.

You, then.

[–] [email protected] 1 points 4 months ago (1 children)

You should work on your reading comprehension.

[–] [email protected] -3 points 4 months ago (2 children)

You should work on your shit ideology and core values, or if you meant something other than what you explicitly said then you should work on your English writing capability.

[–] [email protected] 0 points 4 months ago (1 children)

Your inability to read a straightforward sentence is not my issue.

[–] [email protected] -3 points 4 months ago* (last edited 4 months ago)

You have to start over and throw out the old laws.