My concern is that if libraries cannot use a middleware vendor, like IA, Amazon, or OverDrive, it would make the cost of lending too high for any but the largest library systems to manage.
-
-
It's not about the existence of a middleman it's about the existence of an additional license created from thin air nobody negotiated
1 reply 1 retweet 7 likes -
But that is the crux of my concern over the authors guild's arguments. Remember, their position is not that IA is over lending, but that it is lending at all, despite being a middleware partner for several libraries.
2 replies 0 retweets 0 likes -
No, their position is over the UNILATERAL LICENSE, of lending WITHOUT FURTHER COMPENSATION FOR THE AUTHOR
1 reply 1 retweet 7 likes -
Quoting the Authors Guild: IA has no rights whatsoever to these books
1 reply 0 retweets 0 likes -
Yes, because they didn't pay for them Their position is that buying a physical copy gives you no digital distribution rights whatsoever, which is completely fair (copyright case law has ALWAYS regarded transferring from one medium to another as legally significant)
1 reply 1 retweet 15 likes -
But the libraries which IA is handling ebook distributor for did. Plus IA has a large collection of PD and CC works. You agree that yes, IA can distribute those, yes?
3 replies 0 retweets 1 like -
Yes, and the Authors Guild isn't talking about that, they're talking about the Open Library system, which throws up scans of physical books *without checking* if those books are public domain, orphaned works, if the authors agree to it, etc based on the CDL logic
2 replies 2 retweets 7 likes -
Replying to @arthur_affect @downix and
The idea that the Authors Guild wants the entire Internet Archive destroyed, or has any power to do so (as though the IA is the scrappy underdog in this situation), is part of the disingenuous apologetics here
1 reply 2 retweets 12 likes -
I am not worried about the IA itself. My concern is in how such a blanket statement as given by the AG can and will be applied elsewhere.
1 reply 0 retweets 0 likes
The AG doesn't say that digital lending rights for books don't exist and never can exist, and you know you're lying by arguing it does They're saying that those rights have to be explicitly negotiated and agreed to by the owner
Loading seems to be taking a while.
Twitter may be over capacity or experiencing a momentary hiccup. Try again or visit Twitter Status for more information.