Reply to this post | See parent post | Go Back

View Post [edit]

Poster:	jonc	Date:	August 18, 2008 11:39:25am
Forum:	opensource_movies	Subject:	Re: Profiting off of Archive.org?

I'm not sure what you have in mind in the way of "credit". The Archive is a curator, or a library. It doesn't "own" the works here, it provides servers to store and distribute them. Do you credit the public libray in your sources for an essay?

This makes me think of the closing credits in "Bambi Meets Godzilla"...

Reply to this post

Reply [edit]

Poster:	Ed T.	Date:	August 18, 2008 12:07:24pm
Forum:	opensource_movies	Subject:	Re: Profiting off of Archive.org?

By 'credit' I mean, of course, to acknowledge your source. I _would_ credit my library if they were the sole source of the material in question. Additionally, public libraries are government sponsored and paid for by our tax dollars. Archive.org, while being a non-profit, is still a private entity and dependent on contributions for its survival. So when someone either misrepresents themselves as the source for this material or profits off it without CREDITing their source (Archive.org), then they are in essence denying Archive.org potential revenue to continue operations.

The world is full of parasites, but it's a poor parasite that kills its host...

Reply to this post

Reply [edit]

Poster:	jonc	Date:	August 18, 2008 01:04:45pm
Forum:	opensource_movies	Subject:	Re: Profiting off of Archive.org?

It would be nice publicity for the Archive to have DVDs shipped with the IA label. This would be purely charity, though. The vendors are under no more legal or moral obligation than if they had purchased a tape and digitized it. Would they be bound obligated the video store in that case?

Reply to this post

Reply [edit]

Poster:	Ed T.	Date:	August 18, 2008 03:42:44pm
Forum:	opensource_movies	Subject:	Re: Profiting off of Archive.org?

Your analogies are weak because public libraries and video stores are ubiquitous while entities such as archive.org are not.

Why do you continue to use these poor analogies instead of addressing the stated issue? You appear to have an agenda which is the rationalization of charging people for free content without adding any value. And with this basis you're going to mandate what is and what is not ethical behavior? I think not.