<story><title>How to participate in Monday’s oral arguments re: Internet Archive</title><url>http://blog.archive.org/2023/03/17/heres-how-to-participate-in-mondays-oral-arguments/</url></story><parent_chain><item><author>jl6</author><text>As a strong supporter of the Internet Archive’s primary mission, I am saddened to say that the prosecution appears to have a strong case here. Controlled Digital Lending is a controversial legal theory, not something that has any clear statutory basis. The IA must now hope for some creative judicial interpretation to save them.&lt;p&gt;It’s doubly frustrating because I think the publishers would have let the IA fly under the radar had they stuck to lending on a strictly one-digital-loan for one-physical-copy basis. The National Emergency Library was a serious lapse of judgement - a moment of madness amongst a backdrop of widespread Covid madness. They poked the hornet’s nest. IMHO they should have immediately apologised, leant into it being an honest mistake during a unique historical event, and come to some minor financial settlement. Instead, they and the EFF are doubling down and risk being flattened with a severe bill for compensation.&lt;p&gt;I absolutely would support legislation to properly recognize CDL as a lawful function of libraries. Instead, all our hopes are pinned on the judicial branch doing the job of the legislative branch.&lt;p&gt;P.S. Donate to the IA here: &lt;a href=&quot;https:&amp;#x2F;&amp;#x2F;archive.org&amp;#x2F;donate&amp;#x2F;&quot; rel=&quot;nofollow&quot;&gt;https:&amp;#x2F;&amp;#x2F;archive.org&amp;#x2F;donate&amp;#x2F;&lt;/a&gt;</text></item></parent_chain><comment><author>ta20230318</author><text>While you are correct on the tactical level, with this I do not agree:&lt;p&gt;&amp;gt; The National Emergency Library was a serious lapse of judgement - a moment of madness amongst a backdrop of widespread Covid madness.&lt;p&gt;NO! It was a moment of sanity prompted by an exceptional situation in an absolutely insane world, a world that pretends to value property yet undermines property using IP. It is IP that is the real madness. It is IP that is used to suck every drop of life out of culture the same way Exxon sucks oil out of the ground. And it is IP that is used to bind people when other measures are not effective.&lt;p&gt;I get that the thought that the world is absolutely insane and absurd may not be a popular idea in the startup space which relies on a blind optimism, but IP is simply part of the cancer afflicting this world.&lt;p&gt;You are correct that it was a tactical mistake that endangered the rest of the project but the values that prompted that decision are some of the values that should guide us in building a better world if we want to stand any chance of avoiding a Black Mirror like dystopia on the path towards which the world is very much on.</text></comment>
<story><title>How to participate in Monday’s oral arguments re: Internet Archive</title><url>http://blog.archive.org/2023/03/17/heres-how-to-participate-in-mondays-oral-arguments/</url></story><parent_chain><item><author>jl6</author><text>As a strong supporter of the Internet Archive’s primary mission, I am saddened to say that the prosecution appears to have a strong case here. Controlled Digital Lending is a controversial legal theory, not something that has any clear statutory basis. The IA must now hope for some creative judicial interpretation to save them.&lt;p&gt;It’s doubly frustrating because I think the publishers would have let the IA fly under the radar had they stuck to lending on a strictly one-digital-loan for one-physical-copy basis. The National Emergency Library was a serious lapse of judgement - a moment of madness amongst a backdrop of widespread Covid madness. They poked the hornet’s nest. IMHO they should have immediately apologised, leant into it being an honest mistake during a unique historical event, and come to some minor financial settlement. Instead, they and the EFF are doubling down and risk being flattened with a severe bill for compensation.&lt;p&gt;I absolutely would support legislation to properly recognize CDL as a lawful function of libraries. Instead, all our hopes are pinned on the judicial branch doing the job of the legislative branch.&lt;p&gt;P.S. Donate to the IA here: &lt;a href=&quot;https:&amp;#x2F;&amp;#x2F;archive.org&amp;#x2F;donate&amp;#x2F;&quot; rel=&quot;nofollow&quot;&gt;https:&amp;#x2F;&amp;#x2F;archive.org&amp;#x2F;donate&amp;#x2F;&lt;/a&gt;</text></item></parent_chain><comment><author>ghaff</author><text>Very little of what the IA does is strictly kosher under current law more or less anywhere in the world. They&amp;#x27;ve mostly gotten away with it because, for example, they&amp;#x27;ve mirrored websites that the owners put out in public and generally respect even retroactive requests to take them down. And, as you say, lending out 1 digital for 1 physical is reasonable enough that it&amp;#x27;s easy enough to believe publishers would overlook.&lt;p&gt;(And, yes, they&amp;#x27;re a library&amp;#x2F;archive but that basically means nada in the digital world.)</text></comment>