Internet Archive sends DCMA complaint to GitHub

[DNSB]

In a move I found rather humourous, the IA has complained about a tool for removing DRM from books downloaded from them. The DeGouRou tool repositories have been removed thought the code has popped up on several other sites.

See Internet Archive Targets Book DRM Removal Tool With DMCA Takedown.

[Quoth]

Pot & kettle
IA notorious for loaning copyright scanned books without agreement or royalty payment and also free downloads of copyright material.

I'd even bet a lot of the stuff the IA adds DRM to is scanned or uploaded copyright material and then loaned without making any agreement or paying any royalty.

Now where did I put the flea sized violin?

Does the IA create or license ANY content? Clue in the name.

Simply they should stop hosting copyright material. The IA has no legitimate need for DRM.

But no-one should be removing DRM from IA content or downloading it at all as that's mostly illegally shared/acquired content. So I have no sympathy for the parties on Git making these tools either even though I opposed to DRM except for library loans. No PD or purchased material should ever have DRM.

[jhowell]

It is somewhat concerning to me that the software that was issued the takedown (DeGourou) is not specific to IA. It is an Adobe Digital Editions (ADE) DRM remover.

DeGourou is combination of code from DeDRM (used by many here on MobileRead) and libgourou (an ADE downloader, equivalent to the DeACSM plugin for calibre.)

It is certainly possible that IA could widen the takedown to include DeDRM since that is the original source of the code used in DeGourou to actually perform DRM removal and is used by many for ADE DRM removal.

[SteveEisenberg]

EDIT: I see jhowell posted on this (#3) while I was writing my own bit, and that he knows more.

Originally Posted by DNSB

In a move I found rather humourous, the IA has complained about a tool for removing DRM from books downloaded from them.

Makes sense to me. AFAIK, their system of offering copyrighted books to readers certified as print-disabled in the United States (often can be certified by a public library or university) has not come under legal attack. And this does include putting DRM on downloaded books. If they took the attitude that de-DRMing was fine, perhaps this too would be imperiled.

Of course it would be hard to impossible to stop all de-DRMing. Maybe there is something about the software they are asking to be taken down that makes it especially easy to integrate with Open Library. That I don’t know.

[ZodWallop]

Originally Posted by Quoth

Does the IA create or license ANY content?

They don't create the content, but from what I have seen, they create their own book files.

I don't hate the Internet Archive or their Open Library. I'm glad they exist.

[Leseratte_10]

Originally Posted by jhowell

It is somewhat concerning to me that the software that was issued the takedown (DeGourou) is not specific to IA. It is an Adobe Digital Editions (ADE) DRM remover.

Yes, it's a combination of code from DeDRM and from my ACSM Input plugin, but these aren't the only parts. There's also Internet-Archive-specific code to log in and download the ACSM file from them. It's software designed specifically for IA loans. libgourou is the generic version.

I can understand why they're doing what they're doing. They are being sued by publishers for lending out books they legitimately own, and at least with DMCA takedowns like this they can be like "We're doing anything to prevent people from abusing our system". At least for applications like DeGourou that explicitly advertise "Hey, you can use this to get decrypted PDFs from Internet Archive books".

Originally Posted by SteveEisenberg

Of course it would be hard to impossible to stop all de-DRMing. Maybe there is something about the software they are asking to be taken down that makes it especially easy to integrate with Open Library. That I don’t know.

That's exactly the difference between this and other DRM removal tools. This allows you to just input the URL to an IA book page and it automates all the other steps, downloading the ACSM, the book, and removing the DRM.

Originally Posted by Quoth

Pot & kettle
IA notorious for loaning copyright scanned books without agreement or royalty payment and also free downloads of copyright material.

I'd even bet a lot of the stuff the IA adds DRM to is scanned or uploaded copyright material and then loaned without making any agreement or paying any royalty.

Yeah. Just like physical libraries have done for centuries all over the world, just with a different medium. IA buys one copy of a book, stores it safely, scans it, then makes sure only one person at a time has access to the digital copy at a time using DRM. Physical libraries also don't have to have agreements with or pay royalty to authors.

Yes, I know that due to ancient stupid laws like the DMCA it may not be legal. Format-shifting (converting from one digital format to another) is legal, so why wouldn't converting an analog book into a digital book be, if they're using DRM and only loaning out one copy at a time?

For the authors, publishers, copyright holders - what's the difference if a normal library buys a book and loans it out, versus IA buying a book, scanning it, and loaning out ONE copy at a time? A normal physical library can also just send someone to a bookstore, buy a book, then place it in their library and lend out to people. Why should digital lending be different? Just because IA is larger and has more customers / users?

[Quoth]

Originally Posted by Leseratte_10

Yeah. Just like physical libraries have done for centuries all over the world, just with a different medium.

That's misleading.

Here Libraries do not just buy a physical book. They pay royalties based on number of loads.
Also for ebooks they negotiate and get a library licence (which can be more or less than retail) and also pay a per loan royalty.

IA isn't just buying a copy of a book and scanning it. They are making up their own rules. They also are poor at takedowns of copyright material that people upload to them. They are cheating authors.

[salamanderjuice]

Originally Posted by Quoth

That's misleading.

Here Libraries do not just buy a physical book. They pay royalties based on number of loads.
Also for ebooks they negotiate and get a library licence (which can be more or less than retail) and also pay a per loan royalty.

IA isn't just buying a copy of a book and scanning it. They are making up their own rules. They also are poor at takedowns of copyright material that people upload to them. They are cheating authors.

In North America they do just buy a physical book and loan it out. IA is US based. Not EU or Ireland based.

If copyright holders want stuff taken off IA they can submit DCMA claims and they take it down.

Is ANY eBook library license cheaper than retail? From what I've heard it's generally significantly more with very gross expiry terms that aren't even close to how physical books behave (25-50 loans or two years). I don't really care if publishers are technically right. They have far too much incentive for libraries to not be a thing. There shouldn't be an erosion of rights just because the format has switched from physical to digital.

[jhowell]

Originally Posted by Leseratte_10

Yes, it's a combination of code from DeDRM and from my ACSM Input plugin, but these aren't the only parts. There's also Internet-Archive-specific code to log in and download the ACSM file from them. It's software designed specifically for IA loans. libgourou is the generic version.

Although DeGourou can be used to remove ADE DRM from books obtained elsewhere, it has the ability to get books from IA in a single step. My mistake.

[Quoth]

Originally Posted by salamanderjuice

In North America they do just buy a physical book and loan it out. IA is US based. Not EU or Ireland based.

Who exactly funds IA and their servers in Egypt?

Also a global Internet operation has to meet laws where it's available as Meta/Facebook, Alphabet/Google, X/Twitter, Tiktoc etc have discovered. Having a (tenuous?) US base is irrelevant unless they are operating only within the USA.

Even in USA the Libraries do not buy physical books and loan them as ebooks. The USA libraries do not not make up their own rules.

I used to be a great fan of IA and it's still handy for sites that have gone off line, but they are being sued by publishers. They do ignore copyright violations and take down requests unless you have expensive lawyers.

The convenience and valid services of IA should not blind people to, or excuse, their arrogance and disregard of IP others, even living authors.