Music Labels Will Regret Coming For the Internet Archive, Sound Historian Says (arstechnica.com) 27
An anonymous reader quotes a report from Ars Technica: On Thursday, music labels sought to add nearly 500 more sound recordings to a lawsuit accusing the Internet Archive (IA) of mass copyright infringement through its Great 78 Project, which seeks to digitize all 3 million three-minute recordings published on 78 revolutions-per-minute (RPM) records from about 1898 to the 1950s. If the labels' proposed second amended complaint is accepted by the court, damages sought in the case -- which some already feared could financially ruin IA and shut it down for good -- could increase to almost $700 million. (Initially, the labels sought about $400 million in damages.) IA did not respond to Ars' request for comment, but the filing noted that IA has not consented to music labels' motion to amend their complaint. [...]
Some sound recording archivists and historians also continue to defend the Great 78 Project as a critical digitization effort at a time when quality of physical 78 RPM records is degrading and the records themselves are becoming obsolete, with very few libraries even maintaining equipment to play back the limited collections that are available in physical archives. They push back on labels' claims that commercially available Spotify streams are comparable to the Great 78 Project's digitized recordings, insisting that sound history can be lost when obscure recordings are controlled by rights holders who don't make them commercially available. [...] David Seubert, who manages sound collections at the University of California, Santa Barbara library, told Ars that he frequently used the project as an archive and not just to listen to the recordings.
For Seubert, the videos that IA records of the 78 RPM albums capture more than audio of a certain era. Researchers like him want to look at the label, check out the copyright information, and note the catalogue numbers, he said. "It has all this information there," Seubert said. "I don't even necessarily need to hear it," he continued, adding, "just seeing the physicality of it, it's like, 'Okay, now I know more about this record.'" [...] Nathan Georgitis, the executive director of the Association for Recorded Sound Collections (ARSC), told Ars that you just don't see 78 RPM records out in the world anymore. Even in record stores selling used vinyl, these recordings will be hidden "in a few boxes under the table behind the tablecloth," Georgitis suggested. And in "many" cases, "the problem for libraries and archives is that those recordings aren't necessarily commercially available for re-release."
That "means that those recordings, those artists, the repertoire, the recorded sound history in itself -- meaning the labels, the producers, the printings -- all of that history kind of gets obscured from view," Georgitis said. Currently, libraries trying to preserve this history must control access to audio collections, Georgitis said. He sees IA's work with the Great 78 Project as a legitimate archive in that, unlike a streaming service, where content may be inconsistently available, IA's "mission is to preserve and provide access to content over time." "That 'over time' part is really the key function, I think, that distinguishes an archive from maybe a streaming service in a way," Georgitis said. "The Internet Archive is not hurting the revenue of the recording industry at all," Seubert suggested. "It has no impact on their revenue." Instead, he suspects that labels' lawsuit is "somehow vindictive," because the labels perhaps "don't like the Internet Archive's way of pushing the envelope on copyright and fair use."
"There are people who, like the founder of the Internet Archive, want to push that envelope, and the media conglomerates want to push back in the other direction," Seubert said.
Some sound recording archivists and historians also continue to defend the Great 78 Project as a critical digitization effort at a time when quality of physical 78 RPM records is degrading and the records themselves are becoming obsolete, with very few libraries even maintaining equipment to play back the limited collections that are available in physical archives. They push back on labels' claims that commercially available Spotify streams are comparable to the Great 78 Project's digitized recordings, insisting that sound history can be lost when obscure recordings are controlled by rights holders who don't make them commercially available. [...] David Seubert, who manages sound collections at the University of California, Santa Barbara library, told Ars that he frequently used the project as an archive and not just to listen to the recordings.
For Seubert, the videos that IA records of the 78 RPM albums capture more than audio of a certain era. Researchers like him want to look at the label, check out the copyright information, and note the catalogue numbers, he said. "It has all this information there," Seubert said. "I don't even necessarily need to hear it," he continued, adding, "just seeing the physicality of it, it's like, 'Okay, now I know more about this record.'" [...] Nathan Georgitis, the executive director of the Association for Recorded Sound Collections (ARSC), told Ars that you just don't see 78 RPM records out in the world anymore. Even in record stores selling used vinyl, these recordings will be hidden "in a few boxes under the table behind the tablecloth," Georgitis suggested. And in "many" cases, "the problem for libraries and archives is that those recordings aren't necessarily commercially available for re-release."
That "means that those recordings, those artists, the repertoire, the recorded sound history in itself -- meaning the labels, the producers, the printings -- all of that history kind of gets obscured from view," Georgitis said. Currently, libraries trying to preserve this history must control access to audio collections, Georgitis said. He sees IA's work with the Great 78 Project as a legitimate archive in that, unlike a streaming service, where content may be inconsistently available, IA's "mission is to preserve and provide access to content over time." "That 'over time' part is really the key function, I think, that distinguishes an archive from maybe a streaming service in a way," Georgitis said. "The Internet Archive is not hurting the revenue of the recording industry at all," Seubert suggested. "It has no impact on their revenue." Instead, he suspects that labels' lawsuit is "somehow vindictive," because the labels perhaps "don't like the Internet Archive's way of pushing the envelope on copyright and fair use."
"There are people who, like the founder of the Internet Archive, want to push that envelope, and the media conglomerates want to push back in the other direction," Seubert said.
No they won't (Score:5, Insightful)
Re:No they won't (Score:5, Insightful)
Correct. Sociopaths do not feel regret, only want. Music labels are sociopathic.
Re: (Score:3)
Re: No they won't (Score:2)
It seems like a lot of the countryâ(TM)s promise has been by demolished by sociopathic CEOs, lawyers, investors and legislators all enabling each other. I wonder if there is a standardized psychological test to identify sociopathy.
Re: (Score:1)
Re: (Score:2)
You're gonna go far, you're gonna fly high
You're never gonna die
You're gonna make it if you try
They're gonna love you
Well, I've always had a deep respect
And I mean that most sincerely
The band is just fantastic
That is really what I think
Oh, by the way, which one's Pink?
And did we tell you the name of the game, boy?
We call it riding the gravy train
Re: (Score:2)
Have A Cigar is old, but not that old that it came out on 78
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
Proof of what you say can easily be found on YouTube. It's amazing how many music videos from the 1980/90's are extremely low quality. And I'm talking about the ones on the artists own channels! You think they would be given access to the original recordings. But obviously not.
IA.BAK (Score:5, Insightful)
The Internet Archive was always on thin ice, but with the new U.S. administration I truly think it won't last much longer, unless they move operations to a more liberal and stable jurisdiction. The IA is all about education, an uncensored and nonpartisan documentation of history, equal access to information for everyone -- all things this administration seems to vehemently oppose. And going by how corrupt the judicial system seems to be at this point, the values the IA stands for will probably matter a whole lot more than whether the lawsuit has any legal merit
Re: (Score:2, Offtopic)
Of course my mod points ran out yesterday otherwise I'd mod up this post. Flamebait my ass, its truth.
Re: (Score:3)
I'd suggest that they clone the archive and move a parallel copy of it to Sealand [sealandgov.org]. I'm sure Prince Michael would be receptive to the idea, even after that HavenCo mess back in the early 2000s.
Re: (Score:1)
So... how is that Wayback Machine mirror or backup coming along? The Internet Archive was always on thin ice, but with the new U.S. administration I truly think it won't last much longer, unless they move operations to a more liberal and stable jurisdiction. The IA is all about education, an uncensored and nonpartisan documentation of history, equal access to information for everyone -- all things this administration seems to vehemently oppose. And going by how corrupt the judicial system seems to be at this point, the values the IA stands for will probably matter a whole lot more than whether the lawsuit has any legal merit
Mod parent up.
Re: (Score:3)
This administration is damn near the plot of Brazil https://www.imdb.com/title/tt0... [imdb.com]
It's a fucking clown show and also terrifying.
As in they literally did a grep for gay and DEI and proceeded to run a mass delete. So now government websites are scrubbed of references to the Enola Gay. https://www.newsweek.com/milit... [newsweek.com]
Spot on... (Score:4, Insightful)
"There are people who, like the founder of the Internet Archive, want to push that envelope, and the media conglomerates want to push back in the other direction," Seubert said. And he's absolutely right.
Brewster pisses the BillionBros no end because he gives it away. Their selfish little brains can't comprehend the value of giving art to the masses.
Rock On, Mr. Kahle!
It just never gets old... (Score:3)
Fuck the MPAA! [youtu.be]
The labels don't seem to get it. IA isn't archiving Taylor Swift's latest and greatest hits. They're archiving 78rpm records that are suffering from format rot and aren't even being sold. If the industry had any sense, they'd tell IA that they would do it themselves, then release it the 78rpm recordings both as vinyl and digitally.
It's hard to argue against mpaa rage! (Score:1)
WTF (Score:3)
Most of the recording companies that published 78s no longer exist.
Some were in countries that no longer exist.
The law is clear (Score:3)
... trying to preserve this history ...
The law does not define music and video as history or culture but as property. The law empowers corporations to do as they please with property. Worse, it promises to fight their battles for them for the next 140 years, for free.
This is why other countries operate a sound archive: Corporations must contribute to it and the government ensures that audio-visual piece of history is protected. If the US values private property over history, that's a fault of the US voters.
Re: (Score:2)
There is more nuance than the parent has allowed. The constitution balances individual rights with the public good through the creation, preservation, and release of information. I am a lawyer but not a copyright lawyer (IAALBNACL). I have a strong background in Constitutional, Treaty law, and civil rights law. I am also a CMSC. I have long had a growing suspicion that intellectual property law is due for a shake up based on the plain meaning and original intent of the US Constitution.
All US copyright law
Georgitis (Score:2)
Aside from everything, this sounds like a really interesting disease to suffer from.
What? (Score:2)
Since record companies like money, why doesn't the IA make a financial deal to copy these old works? There could even be an ongoing fee per year or for number of downloads. It beats getting sued for millions, no?
The companies don't have to do anything, the companies get extra money for dead recordings, the works
Fair Game (Score:3)
Anything out-of-print should be unprotected.
That would include music, movies and games.
If I can't buy it, why should it be protected, who is losing revenue???