Of course it’s copyright holders, who else would threathen an online library?
I hope this gets lots of publicity and further aggravate these editor’s reputation.
I hope this gets lots of publicity and further aggravate these editor’s reputation.
it’s been quite a rallying cry for IA, although unfortunately i’m not sure how much individual people can do besides donate to them
need more projects like IA in case it fails
I would love to see tech companies respecting copyrights when they use other people’s content to train their LLMs on.
And, btw, what does The Statesman say about the use of Cloudflare? Aren’t we screwed again?
As someone said on a Reddit-thread on this - IA was buying physical copies of newly published books, photoscanning them, and then through the “Emergency Library”-program, granting (at the time) perpetual access to users in excess of the number of purchased books; that a judge (however biased) would side with the publishers against IA in this case was basically a foregone conclusion based on how copyright law works.
Before they initiated this program they did loan out these photoscans, but only to as many borrowers as they owned copies of books, which made it some kind of grey area that wasn’t enough of a bother for the publishers to care about. By not thinking through the “Emergency Library” at all before initiating it, IA has put their whole operation of lending photoscans in jeopardy as the judge in charge of the case thinks it’s copyright infringement.
