No.23741
There was a while ago a controversy about some writer forcing internet archives to remove some books because what they did went against IP laws.
No.23743
>>23742Hmm, this could be true. Although, the wayback machine actively refused to archive certain websites in the past, like kiwifarms for example. So I wouldn't be so sure about that.
No.23745
>>23744Well, but that's not the point of an internet "archive", to sanitize internet history.
No.23746
op learns about robots.txt
No.23747
>>23746No, OP is learning, that the internet archive/wayback machine are a bunch of hypocrites and liars. And it is quite concerning, that nobody on this glowing ass site seems to care about it.
No.23748
>>23743and? it's their right if they don't want doxx on their servers
No.23749
>>23745a library doesn't have to hold every book in existence.
No.23750
>>23747You're expecting a centralized service to do things, and attributing malice to what can be explained logistically.
Never solely rely on one archive. Maybe you could slap federation onto it, but in the end you'll have multiple archives.
No.23751
>>23747lol neurosis isnt good for you
No.23752
Oh shit, this site is full of glowies defending the so-called "internet archive". It's true, the internet is dead. All this talk about "free flow of information", it was always a big fat lie.
No.23753
>>23752i wish i had problems like yours
No.23754
>>>/leftypol/1798463>Interesting site I've discovered recently. NATO Zizek and MisanthroLand write for them regularly. >https://dev.compactmag.com/Any progress on discovering who owns, operates and controls compactmag, OP?
No.23755
>>23754I have some news for you: You can read texts, but you don't have to agree with them. It's called intellectual curiosity. Something what you don't seem to have.
No.23756
>>23752nobody cares about you kiwifag
No.23757
>>23752No one's defending it, you just have magical (see: logistically unreasonable) expectations of what such a project could entail. The concept of a central, comprehesive
index of the
web is asinine on the surface, and you want that +copies of old versions?
ヽ( `д´*)ノ
No.23758
>>23755Of course glowie. But only glowies constantly push compactmag. Who controls it?
No.23759
The Internet Archive has always respected robots.txt and manual exclusion requests. If they didn't, they would've almost certainly gotten into hot water by now.
No.23760
You are all liars! You are pro-censorship! Yet you call yourself "leftists"! This board is sooo rotten.
https://www.compactmag.com/robots.txt No.23761
>>23760Why would you even think we're anti-censorship? All right wingers including Democrats and democratic socialists should be censored.
No.23762
>>23761True mask-off moment. Leftypol.org/leftychan/reddit - You are all the same. Shitting on the vision of Berners-Lee. It's so over.
No.23767
>>23740You can request to have your aocial media or websites excluded and they always comply, that's likely what happened here. The reason Compact can't be archived is because they've likely asked the IA to block their site, because "muh copyright".
As usual IP laws are cancer.
No.23796
>>23767It's fair use, the website's owners just have a retarded paranoia because of the nature of capitalist competition. Also, they expect IA to not go to court so this is essentially equivalent to beating someone who's already down.
No.23800
>>23796 (me)
After some researching, the status of fair use in the case of Internet Archive is unfortunately unclear. The US laws are so retarded it's not even funny.
No.23802
>>23796Archiving a website might be fair use. Making that archive available to the public might not be. In the US, fair use is determined by judges who usually act in the interests of capital.
Unique IPs: 14