Ask HN: Could what.cd have been considered an archive for copyright purposes?
- what.cd likely held the most complete digital archive of music in all of human history, surpassing any real world library archive.
- The rules of what.cd ensured high quality, bit perfect reproductions with checksum logs of the rips.
- Members of what.cd likely purchased as many, or more CDs as they downloaded, as the rules required this to remain a member.
It seems like the net cultural effects of what.cd far exceeds the economical cost. It was essentially a small club of digital archivists. If I was a librarian, it would make me very sad that it shut down and so much information was lost, likely forever. It's almost like the burning of the Great Library of Alexandria.
Given all that, would a system like what.cd be able to survive legally today, if it was defended as an archival/library? Can libraries be crowdsourced?
2 comments
[ 2.9 ms ] story [ 23.9 ms ] threadBoth what.cd and oink were amazing communities. I haven’t seen anything as involved as these projects since.
Also, libraries are poorly resourced, and if they are the only exception allowed for archiving, how do you scale archival? It seems like if we as a society don't do something about it, then so much will be lost. It seems like the what.cd model actually worked, and I wonder if it could be replicated for other types of media in a legal sense. Like non-profit crowdsourced archival websites, something akin to Wikipedia but for digital media.