
The National Emergency Library is a gift to readers everywhere - diodorus
https://www.newyorker.com/books/page-turner/the-national-emergency-library-is-a-gift-to-readers-everywhere
======
kethinov
The fact that this set off an angry debate about where to draw the line with
copyright just shows how off the rails that debate has been for decades.

Of course the National Emergency Library is a good thing. We created copyright
law to stop people from selling the work of others as their own, not to force
people to pay a toll every time they read a book. We created free public
libraries so that people could consume as much culture as they want for free.
File sharing sites on the Internet serve exactly the same purpose to society
as free public libraries. They allow people to consume as much culture as they
want for free.

It's long overdue to bring copyright law into the 21st century with one small
tweak: legalize noncommercial copyright infringement. Commercial copyright
infringement should remain illegal. Nobody should have the right to profit
from your work but you. But demanding a toll be paid every time a file is
copied is an unrealistic fantasy that is widely ignored in the real world by
public and private file sharing venues.

I understand why authors find arguments like mine upsetting. Their "pay a toll
per copy" business model is obsolete. It's been obsolete for years. But
instead of cheering on the Author's Guild's dinosaur argument and going down
with the sinking ship right along with them, authors should be thinking hard
about new business models that can adapt to the reality where consumer
payments are—in the real world—optional.

I don't have an answer to the business models question. I have a few ideas I
think are worth experimenting with, mostly involving freemium. All I know for
sure is the artificial scarcity model is not the answer and the longer authors
try to cling to it, the longer it will prolong their pain.

~~~
mikro2nd
I believe that many authors would agree with you that the current system is
not ideal and ripe for something better. But right now it's all that writers
have as a way to pay the rent and eat. You admit to having no replacement that
gets writers paid, but you want to take their livelihood from them with no
replacement. No wonder they "cling to it". It's all they have.

Note that the overwhelming majority of writers -- the mid-list majority --
make relatively little money from their writing, even under this "pay per
toll" arrangement and have to subsidise their art by keeping their full-time
jobs and writing for a few hours at night to keep the art flowing.

~~~
falcolas
I disagree, it’s not all they have. And to back that up, I give you Patreon.
One author I follow has over 1,500 patrons, most giving upwards of $3 a month.

Is this viable for all authors? Perhaps not, but between the new self-
publishing market, Patreon, and pay-by-what’s-read models like KU, there’s
more options than the shitty ebook racket that the publishers have created.

~~~
Zonulet
Business models like self-publishing and Kindle Unlimited have worked really
well for romance and fantasy novelists who can publish six books a year and
have fans who plough through two books a week. They absolutely have not worked
for literary novelists, let alone historians, biographers etc. If the "sell
copies of books to readers" model dies, it will change the kinds of books that
get written. For people who see books as a fungible commodity – any book is
about as good as any other – that's fine. For the rest of us, it isn't.

~~~
falcolas
You make an assumption that people aren’t willing to pay to support the
creation of non-fiction books. I think this is bunk.

An extremely relevant example: Veritasium. He creates well researched and
scientific videos on YouTube (at a rate of maybe 3-4 a year), and has almost
5,000 patrons.

Again, can every author survive this way? No, but there are other options;
please don’t get hung up on the familiar and call it the only way.

~~~
Zonulet
What are your options if your book is going to take years of work and you
don't already have a following?

~~~
Cerium
Start with something smaller or find an interested wealthy patron. Same
options as if I wanted to start a business that will take years of development
to achieve traction.

How does anyone get a following? You build it over time.

~~~
Zonulet
I can assure you there are a lot of great books that would not have been
written if the authors first had to either 1. become beloved enough on the
internet that they could crowdfund their income for five years or 2. somehow
secure a "wealthy patron" who wanted to finance it (I can imagine a pretty
fierce competition for that pretty rare beast).

------
themodelplumber
I love that the library is using its "copyright superpowers" here. I know not
everyone approves, but keep in mind that this is just one more way in which
this organization has improved the lives of many thousands of people. I was
looking through my favorites the other day and it's just incredible how much
value is being delivered at archive.org even prior to this move.

Big thanks to IA, I will be donating again this year as usual, and I hope
others will also.

------
dang
Recent and related:

[https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=22731472](https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=22731472)

[https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=22716923](https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=22716923)

[https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=22731637](https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=22731637)

[https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=22715009](https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=22715009)

[https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=22681132](https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=22681132)

------
comex
It's a gift, yes. But was it their gift to give?

~~~
Causality1
Artificial scarcity is a disease infecting our culture.

~~~
saagarjha
It is, but there’s a chance that the move might cause more “artificial
scarcity“, not less.

~~~
newswasboring
Would you care to elaborate? I am not familiar with this line of thought.

~~~
Mindwipe
I suspect this move will ultimately bankrupt the Internet Archive and lead to
the wholesale destruction of the (useful) existing service.

There's astonishing hubris involved in launching this product.

~~~
ForHackernews
I don't think they'd have done this without a plan. It looks to me like
they're trying to force a court battle, and they've cleverly chosen to do it
at a time when public opinion will be overwhelmingly on their side.

~~~
Mindwipe
Public opinion is pretty irrelevant to a court battle.

If they are trying to force one they are stupid, it's a huge legal risk and no
credible lawyer would advise it.

~~~
newswasboring
Are you a lawyer? How familiar are you about the law in this case? I am
actually not that familiar but I believe a service which as gone on for 24
years knows what it is doing.

~~~
bluntfang
>I believe a service which as gone on for 24 years knows what it is doing.

Huh. What's your opinion on the current financial crises where companies that
are over decades old don't have more than a week in emergency funds before
they have to go bankrupt, lay off most of their employees, can't afford
mortgage payments, etc? Did they all know what they were doing?

~~~
newswasboring
They didn't get to choose the natural calamity which caused all this. They
never planned for a global natural disaster. I didn't expect them to because
there was no reason to.

IA got to choose to do this.

------
empressplay
I <3 IA and I <3 everyone involved at IA _but_ fiction books should not be
part of the NEL unless they have distinctive cultural importance (and by
extension have already made their authors a pile of money.) Anything non-
fiction should totally be free to access during this time of crisis.

~~~
fnord123
So made up stuff has more value than heard earned truths? That's a really
weird result.

~~~
mikro2nd
People like art, I guess. Weird, I know...

