Why not? That’s exactly what physical libraries do. Why should it be any different for a library that so happens to be on the internet?
Comment on Internet archive is library of alexandria of our time
phillaholic@lemm.ee 11 months agoYea imo, they’ve done too far in their scope. You can’t just put up copyrighted works that are still readily for sale unrestricted like that. The whole library model only makes sense based on scarcity.
Psythik@lemm.ee 11 months ago
MrScottyTay@sh.itjust.works 11 months ago
It’s because you’re not using that legally bought copy. You’re creating a new copy from that one.
I love the internet archive, especially when dealing with older consoles and pc’s but I see why there’s a problem. I think copyrighted works should probably still be uploaded but maybe not downloadable until there’s no other way. That way we can upload for posterity without it being linked to piracy. But also that’s an unrealistic moderation nightmare to deal with
Send_me_nude_girls@feddit.de 11 months ago
You can copy blu-rays you got from your library. You can scan a book. If the time spend doing so, is your only argument, that’s pretty weak.
MrScottyTay@sh.itjust.works 11 months ago
The issue is that if you do personal copies you’re not usually putting them out there for the whole world to see publicly.
phillaholic@lemm.ee 11 months ago
That’s a good idea.
9point6@lemmy.world 11 months ago
I would argue broadening of the scope only increases legitimacy—if the goal is to build an archive of literally everything, any objection to an individual piece of content is of diminishing validity.
And FWIW, I think an archive of everything is an incredibly valuable endeavour we should protect. We’ve already lost far too much media.
phillaholic@lemm.ee 11 months ago
Be realistic. If every movie ever produced were legally available on IA, no one would ever buy a movie again. If no one ever buys a movie again, the industry would crumble overnight and there would no longer be new movies. Libraries exist in the physical space under much stricter limitations. They simply can’t stock a million copies of the same thing. The logistics limit them. Going digital is a paradigm shift that causes the entire model to be questioned, especially if these pieces of media aren’t being paid for.
9point6@lemmy.world 11 months ago
Straight up piracy is simpler than getting all your content from archive.org if it was there anyway (e.g. the direct download speeds are very limited, there’s no real discoverability). People still pay for movies and streaming services, so if the content being available for free was going to kill the industry, it would have already happened.
In fact we’ve repeatedly seen over and over again, people just pay for content if the service is actually better than piracy. Convenience is king, and archive.org is not optimised for convenient content consumption à la netflix, and as far as I can tell changing that is not a goal of theirs.
phillaholic@lemm.ee 11 months ago
Are we talking about the merits of the Internet Archive as a library or whether or not piracy matters? If you conflate the two, then IA is piracy and they will lose.