Alot of rare Cinemaphile content is solely stored on the Internet Archive. Download all you can now.
https://torrentfreak.com/record-labels-hit-internet-archive-with-new-400m-copyright-lawsuit-230812/
Alot of rare?
Alot of rare Cinemaphile content is solely stored on the Internet Archive. Download all you can now.
https://torrentfreak.com/record-labels-hit-internet-archive-with-new-400m-copyright-lawsuit-230812/
A lot*
and now it's all gonna get taken down, thanks
obama
Having "AI" software shred and regurgitate art without permission, with the explicit intent to devalue and replace the people who created the art, isn't stealing but archiving old art that no one is making a profit off of is? We are in for rough waters if tech bro shitheads are allowed to continue to run the show.
Anon, you're assuming they have some sort of structured, principled ideology that informs their decisions. It's greed and opportunism that guides everything they do. They decide what they want and then they make up excuses and reasons for why they have the moral high ground for wanting it.
Good point. Add that there are several persons or institutes that act indepently and only care about their stuff not the archiving in itself.
Yes, because the former is something that soulless techgay drones could make money off of, and the latter isn't, which is why the latter is bad and needs to be illegalized ASAP. Please understand.
Internet Archive is in bad water since they gave away unlimited books for free with the lockdown, and it harmed writers so the writers guild of America sued them with most book publishers. So it's being treated as a basic pirating site.
Internet Archive lost that battle in court, so everybody is trying to due them now since they know they cannot win.
Oh yeah, so there is a company connected to the Internet Archive, and them being sued is due to being tied to a secondary company that made profits from putting stuff on the archive, mainly with books being bought second hand instead of though the publisher.
It “harmed” writers the same way that piracy “harms” games and TV, people who could not afford or simply had no interested in coughing up money for Chuck Wendig’s fanfiction had the chance to check out digital books during the pandemic. It’s imagined profit margins that never existed in the first place simply because an alternative was made apparent. “Opportunity cost” as MBA holders like to cope about.
It’s a meme to say this at this point, but it never stops being true: the only reason libraries are allowed to exist is because they have been so ingrained into the American public consciousness, it’s hard to get rid of them solely in the name of privatization. You have to come up with frivolous shit to try and get the public to root for you like lawsuits and culture war shit so that you can make them go the way of public baths and bathrooms, poorhouses and so on.
Piracy is at least harder for normalgays to get to, but when a well known site does it, then it's bad and it gave the excuse for them to be sued. Even Cinemaphile takes down stuff if someone issues a copyright strike. The only reason they have a case is because of them giving away books as a free download without the consent of the book creators and even more so after the archive got investigated more.
>Even Cinemaphile takes down stuff if someone issues a copyright strike.
The only time I've ever seen that happen was Comikey doing it for Kengan Omega chapters on Cinemaphile.
I've had posts blocked on Cinemaphile because of the Bittersweet Candy Bowl creators being pissy that taeshi's lewder works are floating around. Blew my mind that Cinemaphile has a copyright claim system.
It's rarer on Cinemaphile then other websites but it happens occasionally on Cinemaphile when someone leaks unreleased shit, often when it makes the product or company look bad and they want it off ASAP
Also as other anon said a particular comic's creator browses and will nuke any more suggestive image his wife made years back, those are really the only two times you'll se it here
I get that, but I can't help but look at it for the cynical ploy it was. It was a non-profit service in a time where people had to risk infection to track down old texts and otherwise, it didn't generate wealth or really take from existing possible revenue streams, very few people were going out anywhere, especially to grab books.
You're not wrong, and obviously having a face only made the target easier, but I wish we weren't at the heels of corporate bullshit as it actively holds back projects to help improve the free flow of information because """opportunity cost."""
this outcome was so obviously inevitable to me I will never stop seething about it and I'll never stop seething about the people who argued that what the Internet Archive was doing was totally cool. It was not totally cool, there was too much at stake. It's like they ran across a busy highway to save a stranded person but with a baby strapped to their back. It's not like there weren't literally millions of hours worth of legally free entertainment for people to avail themselves to during the pandemic.
At some point you have to recognize when you are too valuable to be taking stupid legal risks like that anymore.
Yeah it was pure moronation. And then this new music one was a careless mistake too. What a fricking waste.
naw man, they pulled off a great troll job on us
>compels UMG to waste huge amounts of time and money on frivolous lawsuits over ancient dusty songs none of the involved parties were alive for
>we're laughing at them not with them
if i was the judge i'd throw the case out and fine UMG for wasting everyone's time
>value
>people
once again, everyone avoids the issue of unsustainable capitalism as the planet is destroyed and temperatures rise
>unsustainable capitalism
dilate
Communism lead to an entire island having to be quarantined because of anthrax poisoning the soil and is also the source of the defacto worst nuclear disaster in human history. Don’t pretend socialism is any fricking better at protecting the planet you fricking disengenuous homosexual.
Anthrax island was in the UK moron, you should have brought up the Aral sea instead.
And you mixed up communism and socialisim
writers lost
"artists" lost
AI won
ChatGPT won
an AI is going to take your job
learn a trade
Please contract brain cancer.
Don't worry, those jobs will be automated too.
Considering writing and art are already trades, very much an apt response to that shitpost.
Having worked in an actual car factory, there’s just tons of things you simply can’t automate at a cost effective scale over just paying an hourly worker to do it. I worked in the paint department and I actually discussed why our specific positions can’t be automated with a coworker. What was our job? We were the guys that sanded the defects out of the paint when the robots were done laying down the base coat. Said robots would also break down once a week minimum, sometimes for multiple hours. I call them “robots” and to a moron like you I’m sure youre thinking of something fancy. No, these are literally just mechanical arms with a paint turbine mounted on top programmed to go back and forth in their repetitive XYZ coordinates. They’d still frick up, every goddamn month, turning a 9 hour shift into 13 hours as the robot techs had to spend 2 hours troubleshooting once the arm that was SUPPOSED to open the door to spray the exterior missed and that caused the entire system to spaz the frick out.
Anyhow you can’t automate everything and if you do, congrats you still need live technicians to monitor the machines because they WILL need maintenance and they WILL frick up. Oh yeah, good luck designing a robot that can thread the wiring in the car door effectively when a person can easily thread them in 30 seconds or less.
Not sure why you're replying to the anon being tongue in cheek instead of the unironic "learn a trade" shitposter. Current text/image AIs all require uncredited "cleanup" positions like your car factory does to fix the messes of the robot's sloppy work, and the ideal goal for all corporations is full automation cause they don't want to pay anyone a dime when the robot exists. Of course it's not real/unachievable, but that's the dream being sold. Save this scorn for AI evangelists.
Its aimed at the AI morons as well though.
I’m fricking tired of midwits pretending that this dogshit idea of robots being able to do anything and everything is “inevitable!” just because they have the same type of magical thinking as schizophrenics.
if only we had your stability pajeet
Alright if you say so, you can go and slither back under your rock now you fricking coward
Yeah, about that:
https://www.firstpost.com/tech/news-analysis/openai-may-go-bankrupt-by-2024-chatgpt-costs-company-700000-dollars-every-day-12986012.html
>startup operates at a loss
Wow, stop the fricking presses
It's failing because the free, unrestricted, open-source variants that you can run locally are better than it in nearly every way. Corporate-level AI will fall but homemade AI will run forever.
>learn a trade
Machines already do most of them and if they don't the will
AI and the "people" who advocate for it are pure evil.
I fricking hope an anti AI terrorist organitzation arrives soon and starts burning down their servers, let's what those so called "artists" can do by themselves
The engineers behind chatGPT have literally admitted to using pirated book databases to train the AI; it's pretty obviously illegal and is already going to court. But the technology of this shit moves faster than the legal system.
>Greedy as frick record companies and entertainment execs are obviously at fault
>THE EBIL AI IS BEHIND THIS!!!!!!!
this post glows so much it's incredible, you really want these same companies controlling AI as well? You're fighting for MORE corporate control of our daily lives and de-legitimizing your entire argument
You actual fricking troony. If artists weren't greedy, selfish, entitled, corrosive pieces of shit they wouldn't be replaced by AI that lets the little guy do their own thing.
>lets the little guy do their own thing.
whenever I see Cinemaphile pajeets say this it lets me know they've never created anything of value in their lives
They're people who want artists to make all of their ideas and do it, like jannies, for free. When they have to pay money for actual things they get upset and throw tantrums mostly because they're NEETs using mommy's money. This is generally the mindset of a lot of pirates as well. Generally I'm for piracy but there's definitely a sense of entitlement that's come over people where they get offended at the very idea of having to pay for anything and feel like whatever they want they should be able to just take for free and frick actually compensating creators for it.
Ironically a lot of these people would also probably b***h about shit like anarchism or communism (even though they ARE moronic, unworkable ideologies).
Hey, unpublished nobody, this is what rote intelligence is for. Can it.
>but archiving old art that no one is making a profit off of is?
Yes. This means you can't resell it
The video game industry is basically this, and why companies like Nintendo REALLY hates things like ROMs, emulators, and so on.
Preservation isn't profitable for corporations, unless they're specifically in the preservation/restoration business. They want shit to break over and over again so that they can fix it or you buy a replacement.
nah Nintendo is just run by old Japanese men who cannot into Internet
Your fault for not praying for a solar flare to destroy all data. That's the only scenario that could make people understand the value of Digital Preservation
That's moronic.
Reality is not smart
Don't blame reality for your single digit IQ.
I mean…
That one is kinda reality’s fault
So what exactly is worth saving? Don't really feel like archiving an entire website.
The Invader Zim DVDs, including the bonus disc that was only in the house set.
>Filed in Manhattan federal court late Friday, the complaint alleges infringement of 2,749 works, recorded by deceased artists, including Frank Sinatra, Billie Holiday, Louis Armstrong and Bing Crosby.
Oh no, those poor corpses...
>Oh no, those poor corpses...
Yeah, and what about the musicians?
None of those musicians are alive, their "Right To Be Forgotten" is falsely presumed
Which is funny because outside very few examples all these recordings are probably worth $100,000 max given they'll be PD soon and they aren't bought or listened to or even played on the radio anymore
These were all recorded under the old 28+28 copyright system, a lot of them were probably not renewed and have been PD for quite some time by now.
Seeing as the Internet Archive has a copyright ID system for music I'd say yeah they were likely public domain if the system didn't catch them. Archived music is typically just archived and then you can listen to short samples.
What was the cost of a 78 record in 1948? I want to guess about $5-$6 a piece. If you took that and multiplied it for all 2,749 of those recordings it would amount to all of $16,494. Even if you inflation adjusted and supposed each disc would cost around $30 in today's money then you would get at most $82,000.
Solution: Pay $1 for each recording. Thus $2,749. (^:
Decent chance a big chunk of the material in question has been out of print for decades and the labels have no intention of correcting ever that but are suing anyway,
>>>/t/
Wrong board
I HATE THE ANTICHRIST
YYYYEEEEEEAAAAAAHHHHHHHHH
Frick off christcuck
I don’t believe in the Christian hell, everything can be purified with time.
So what should I download?
Vintage magazines. Porn, genre fiction etc.
>AI seethe completely unrelated to Internet Archive out of nowhere
holy mindbroken
Wait, they're being sued over songs that should be well into the public domain by now?
Wow, the Cinemaphile insider was not larping.
>op wasn't gay
why is it only for bad things
Are these people seriously suing over those albums that are only available as 30 second samples, or those extremely dirty/frequently skipping vinyl single rips from pre-1970?
Just like the big publisher lawsuit from a few months ago, absolutely nothing is going to come of it. All this time later and I can still borrow books like an "official" digital library service.
>Just like the big publisher lawsuit from a few months ago, absolutely nothing is going to come of it.
IE lost the lawsuit and has their distribution abilities specifically limited to their physical reserve. The lawsuit costs also hit them pretty bad, and it’s clear the record companies smelt blood in the water.
Isn’t this shit nationalized like the Library of Congress?
No, and I'd bet these companies would go after the Library of Congress if they thought they could get away with it.
No, a few years ago the Music Modernization Act was established to cover copyright and royalties in regards to streaming which also included a clause that all pre-1972 music recordings were now under copyright until 2067.
>all pre-1972 music recordings were now under copyright until 2067
For what fricking purpose, holy shit.
>For what fricking purpose, holy shit.
Music industry passes checks to congressmen who are elected by the people to work for the benefit of rich corporations and not the people who elected them. If there's anything the government (and corporations) hate, it's freely available information. It's why they killed Aaron Swartz who, coincidentally, died ten years ago back in January.
Not entirely true, the background is that pre-1972 recorded works were never under Federal law because of some weird shenanigans in the early 1900s, so those were covered over weird state laws which sometime lasted forever and conflicted with each other a lot. The act federalized them, but orphan works remain PD and it still follows the immediate PD after 95 years rule (so 2067 = when 1972 works are in the PD if terms don't get added or reduced)
Think that 95 years is still dumb as shit but AFAIK it didn't rip anything out of the PD and isn't extending works to 144 year terms
https://www.copyhype.com/2018/05/no-the-classics-act-is-not-a-term-extension/
>No, a few years ago the Music Modernization Act was established to cover copyright and royalties in regards to streaming which also included a clause that all pre-1972 music recordings were now under copyright until 2067.
I am in no way calling for violence when I say that I'm absolutely baffled at the lack of violence directed at the CEOs of megacorps. We're at the point where in lots of old scifi about dystopias, people would at least be TRYING to do something about rich douchebags that want to own all the music in the world and replace artists with machines.
Aldous Huxley's version of the future was right. The opressive Big Brother dystopia isn't jackbooted but instead simply ups the division between those opposed to them or ostracization and dispenses more bread and circuses.
>No, a few years ago the Music Modernization Act was established to cover copyright and royalties in regards to streaming which also included a clause that all pre-1972 music recordings were now under copyright until 2067.
This is only partially true. It goes like this:
>For recordings first published before 1923, the copyright term ends on December 31, 2021.
>Recordings first published between 1923-1946 are protected for 100 years.
>Recordings first published between 1947-1956 are protected for 110 years.
>For all remaining recordings first made prior to February 15, 1972, protection shall end on February 15, 2067.
What it did do was make sound recordings delayed from the public domain for a few years, so like movies and books and sheet music from 1923 became public domain in 2019, but any still-in copyright sound recordings from 1923 became PD in 2022.
It's still longer than necessary, but only stuff made from 1956 to 1972 that are still copyrighted, are the ones that will be copyrighted until 2067.
>but any still-in copyright sound recordings from 1923 became PD in 2022.
Oops, change that to 2024. Still too long, but I'm just glad it's not 2067.
The funniest shit is that the "the lawsuit claims the recordings are all available on authorized streaming services and “face no danger of being lost, forgotten, or destroyed.”" but master recordings of a lot of the artists being sued over were destroyed in the Universal fire
Nationalized? No. The Library of Congress recognize and collaborate with Internet Archive, but its an independent nonprofit entity that runs most costs from their own pocket.
Corporations being moronic and letting works of collective social value be destroyed is okay because the studio can write it off for insurance. Making backups is bad because "B-b-but, you're supposed to pay *us* money for that... :("
First reply was meant for
, I'm fricking stupid and apologize
The... third-- it's third now, right? There's probably more. The third burning of the Library of Alexandria?
Part of me is convinced there's some Discord server that was immediately formed when the publisher lawsuit hit and they've been figuring out a secret archive in case shit hits the fan
>they've been figuring out a secret archive in case shit hits the fan
You obviously have more faith in those morons that run it than I do.
Hopefully these guys are on top of it
https://wiki.archiveteam.org/index.php/ArchiveTeam_Warrior
>They named 2,749 sound-recording copyrights that the Archive allegedly infringed. The labels said their damages in the case could be as high as $412 million.
First off, of those 2,749 recordings how many are actually good songs as opposed to B-sides/filler? Perhaps as much as 60-70% might fall under that category.
>Alot of rare Cinemaphile content is solely stored on the Internet Archive
such as?
Damn once this site gets shut down it's all over for digital preservation. I've been preparing for this day by downloading rare YouTube videos these past few years. I still do not want to see the loss of so much progress that was made for something I am passionate about.
>The complaint lists 2,769 individual works from some of the most fmaous artists of all time, including Frank Sinatra, Ella Fitzgerald, Billie Holiday, Miles Davis, and Louis Armstrong. Listed songs include “White Christmas” by Bing Crosby, “Sing, Sing, Sing” by Benny Goodman, “Peggy Sue” by Buddy Holly, and “Roll Over Beethoven” by Chuck Berry.
Those vultures can have them. I don't listen to boomer music anyway.
>all of those people are fricking dead and most have been dead for literal decades
>record companies still cry about it being infringement like it was their birthright
Oy vey
>lists 5 good songs and not the hundreds of shitty ones and filler material in there
Somebody grab all of the Underground Comics scans
That's what I'm doing now. Anything not already on RCO
The internet continues to be sterilized .
Better get there now before your favorite cartoon or movie is deleted
You have time because this lawsuit will take months and months but don't delay things too long
>Having to archive the archive
Grim.
3-2-1 my friend, if you want to make sure, you have to make backups of the backups
Welcome to life
Nothing is safe or preserved
Some are saying because it's a basically camera recordings of 78 records it might pass like Lenz v. Universal Music Corp.
Discuss
>Some are saying because it's a basically camera recordings of 78 records it might pass like Lenz v. Universal Music Corp.
I know that. As an example you can upload a phone camera video on Youtube of The Lion King playing on a TV, since it's just a recording of a TV running and Disney can't do squat.
frick cuck wendig
What does this have to do with co
If the internet archive goes down, the comics and cartoons that are easily accessible on the internet archive will be harder to access. Really its just a springboard to talk about data related politics but at least its vaguely more on topic than some other threads
Why would the archive go down and just not take down the recording project?
Do you think they'll survive paying 400 million for uploading 2000 records before any additional lawsuits when the israelites smell blood?
That's why I upload all my shit to private trackers and not internet archive. The shit is just going to get taken down anyway.