Google Books (or similar) all book scans – $200k bounty (2025)
A new $200k bounty from Anna’s Archive for a full leak of Google Books’ scanned corpus is reigniting long‑running tensions over piracy, copyright, and access to knowledge. Commenters debate the ethics and legality of exfiltrating such a dataset, how it would compare to AI companies quietly training on similar material, and whether current copyright terms are defensible in a digital world where many readers can’t legally or affordably obtain books. The thread also examines how shadow libraries are funded, their growing role in academic and global access to literature, and the broader impact on authors’ livelihoods.
Scope of the bounty / technical approach
- Anna’s Archive offers up to $200k for a full Google Books (or similar) dump, plus other bounties (e.g., Internet Archive PDFs, Library of Congress MARC, full text versions).
- Commenters outline a high-level approach:
- Discover how Google Books exposes page fragments and iteratively fetch contiguous pages.
- Bypass bot detection and rate limiting via sophisticated browser automation or purchased “clean” identities.
- Several note this is technically feasible but highly inconvenient at scale, which is precisely why the bounty is large.
Legal and personal risk
- Many argue exfiltrating Google’s internal corpus would likely move from civil copyright infringement into criminal territory.
- Risks include corporate lawsuits, criminal charges, and pursuit of estates after death; some doubt an employee would do it “just for money.”
- There is skepticism that random employees have direct, bulk access to the full dataset or could copy petabytes without detection.
Funding and role of Anna’s Archive
- People question how Anna’s Archive funds six-figure bounties; answers in the thread:
- Paid fast-access memberships.
- High-priced, high-speed access for AI companies and data brokers, reportedly mostly non‑US firms.
- Anna’s Archive is described as an aggregator of many shadow libraries (LibGen, Z-Lib, etc.), now functioning as a primary “source” for many.
Piracy, copyright, and creator compensation
- Strong support from users in countries with limited legal access or non-convertible currencies; they credit AA/Z‑Lib with enabling their education.
- Others stress that piracy can hurt authors’ income and that many writers already struggle; they argue for buying when possible or using piracy as a “preview.”
- Multiple threads debate:
- Excessive copyright duration vs. authors’ rights.
- Libraries vs. digital licensing and recent legal defeats for the Internet Archive.
- Micropayments or subscription models vs. outright piracy.
AI, training data, and hypocrisy claims
- Discussion highlights that many AI labs (especially outside the US) pay AA for training access.
- Some note a perceived HN inconsistency: anger at LLM training on copyrighted works vs. enthusiasm for outright distribution of pirated books.
- Others justify the difference by framing piracy as helping individuals access knowledge, while AI training is framed as enriching large corporations.