They say that the internet never forgets, but the existence of this website proves that statement to be a huge lie. Sometimes media is even found then lost then found again. Ideally that scenario would never happen, so how do we try to better prevent it from happening?
Well, you've read the title. Seeing links to found media on Youtube just makes me nervous. It runs a high risk of being taken down, rightly so or not. We've all heard creators talk about how garbage Youtube's copyright claiming system is. Google Drive and Mega aren't much better. Those links are only good as long as the account is up, and we're playing the long game here.
How?
There are a few different locations on an article where the link to the found media itself may be found. It could be a video embedded in the gallery, or in the external links. There may be multiple parts in either of these cases too. I think downloading it manually might be the best option, because someone would likely have to correct the mistakes of an automated mass-download anyway.
To keep track of which media has been archived, we could use a shared spreadsheet. This is just my idea of what we'd have to keep track of, I'd love to hear any suggestions for improvement. Also my criticism of Google still applies to this spreadsheet, but I think it would be an okay platform as long as regular backups were made.
I'm not adamant that we keep it organized this way, but if anyone wants to add to this spreadsheet then by all means send a request to edit!
I thought the archive was in trouble at the moment?
Only it's digital book-lending program is in potential trouble, everything else about the site won't be affected by whatever the outcome of that court-ruling will be.
I thought the archive was in trouble at the moment?
I found this article which goes into some depth on the lawsuit.
"Still, the plaintiffs are asking for the Internet Archive to repay financial damages for 127 copyrighted titles present in the Open Libraries: according to an estimate by Vox, if the publishers win they could receive up to $19 million dollars in damages—equivalent to one year of the Archive’s operating revenue.
Although the lawsuit clarifies that the publishers don’t want the rest of the Internet Archive to close, it asks for a preliminary and permanent injunction of the Internet Archive’s digitization and lending processes, claiming that the fact that the Internet Archive offers more than 33,000 of their copyrighted works for free download means the digital library is unfairly competing with their authorized ebooks. A permanent injunction would leave the digital library depleted and risk future efforts by the Internet Archive."
It would be pretty terrible if the publishers won the case, but it wouldn't spell certain doom. Here's another piece of info I found interesting.
"Now, both the Internet Archive and the publishers are hoping to settle the matter without needing a full trial: both parties requested a pre-motion conference on a motion for summary judgment—meaning a federal judge will rule on the suit instead of a jury."
So, I'm definitely concerned but cautiously optimistic that IA will continue to stick around. Despite all of this, I still think it's one of the better options for archiving media right now (which tells you something about the current state of the internet).
Of course, more mirrors is more better. If a collaborative spreadsheet does take off, maybe we could encourage contributors to hold onto their files as well as add additional mirrors to the spreadsheet.
The thing with archiving is, the more places you preserve it, the more chances it will stay saved. Good thing to have the eggs in multiple baskets at once.
So we should make Archive.org an even bigger target for the mass media?
That is a good point, we wouldn't want to jeopardize the Internet Archive more by inadvertently creating a new scandal or something. Personally I think it's unlikely if all we're doing is encouraging people to upload new and old found media.
If the uploading was done by a single account or all put into a single collection, I agree that might not end very well. The entire thing could be deemed a problem and taken down. That's one reason I think the uploading should be crowdsourced.
The thing is, this encouragement is exactly what's going to lead to that outcome. If you encourage people to upload everything to a single site, and they carry through with it, then the mass media companies will catch on and cause legal problems for the site.
The thing is, this encouragement is exactly what's going to lead to that outcome. If you encourage people to upload everything to a single site, and they carry through with it, then the mass media companies will catch on and cause legal problems for the site.
True I mean youtube could strike everything quickly and archive.org could be taken against the uploader.
i'd rather upload to multiple different sites, especially sites where i know it will be downloaded and saved by other users.
besides archive.org still has things you cant upload due to copyright reasons.
which is when uploading something there, why i always check to see if what i want to upload has similar files already there that have not been taken down.