Internet Archive's big battle with music publishers ends in settlement

Scope of the lawsuit and copyright damages

• Commenters note that in copyright cases, statutory damages sidestep the usual need to prove concrete harm, giving large rightsholders powerful leverage.
• Some argue judges “can do whatever they want” in this area; others point out that this was baked into the 1976 Copyright Act and later reforms.

Internet Archive’s governance and management

• Several comments question IA’s governance: presence and independence of its board, lack of apparent accountability, and willingness to take on high‑risk copyright fights.
• IA is criticized for “side projects” (Controlled Digital Lending / Emergency Library, Great 78 Project, starting a credit union) that exposed the whole organization while being tangential to core web archiving.
• Leaks of patron data, opaque operations, and unaddressed tech debt (broken torrents, inconsistent processes) are cited as further evidence of poor management.

Sloppy infringement vs. preservation mission

• Many point out obviously infringing uploads (e.g., mainstream albums, movies, Nintendo ROM sets) that make IA look like “Mega with a veneer of respectability.”
• Others stress IA’s genuine cultural value: digitizing 78 rpm collections that would otherwise be destroyed or inaccessible, and preserving materials that may outlast their physical media.
• A recurring theme: IA could have used existing law (Music Modernization Act, DMCA safe harbor, noncommercial-use procedures) but instead chose riskier interpretations (e.g., fundraising around in‑copyright works).

Books, “Emergency Library,” and library analogy

• Debate over whether IA is truly a library: some see it as the most useful “library” they have; others echo judges/librarians saying it doesn’t follow traditional library ethics or practices.
• The National Emergency Library and CDL case are viewed by many as self‑inflicted wounds that motivated publishers to attack IA more broadly.

Fair use, labels, and over-enforcement

• Labels’ hostility toward IA is compared to aggressive takedowns against YouTube music‑analysis channels and sports highlight commentary.
• Commenters describe a system where automated enforcement, lack of penalties for false claims, and lawyer‑driven risk-avoidance lead to blanket takedowns even when use is likely fair.

Piracy, ethics, and public sentiment

• Some defend widespread “piracy” on IA as ethically justified, especially for abandoned or out‑of‑print works, and blame copyright law’s imbalance toward publishers.
• Others argue that IA’s tolerance of obvious, current commercial content undermines its moral high ground and endangers its preservation mission.

Financial fragility and future risk

• Shared 990 data show IA running multi‑million‑dollar annual deficits and now having negative net assets, raising concerns about long‑term viability after multiple settlements.
• People worry that next in line will be film, TV, and games, and that one more large loss could be existential.

Jurisdiction, decentralization, and alternatives

• Some propose moving IA offshore or to countries with weak copyright enforcement, but others highlight practical issues: physical infrastructure, connectivity, political pressure, and centuries‑long time horizons for copyright expiry.
• Decentralized, protocol‑based archives (e.g., Nostr‑like systems) are floated as a longer-term answer so that no single organization can be sued into oblivion.

Relationship to governments and libraries

• A few ask why IA isn’t a function of the Library of Congress; responses fear political interference and censorship if it were fully governmental.
• There is tension between wanting strong public funding for a “memory of the internet” and wanting it insulated from both corporate and political control.