Hacker News new | ask | show | jobs
by tivert 1147 days ago
> While destroying the last microfilm copy is a tragedy, I'm less confident that the person is being irresponsible. Preserving culture legally is difficult to do. Some people have weird beliefs that the law is somehow advisory and common sense rather than the law.

At least in the US, there's a very longstanding practice of local libraries maintaining newspaper archives (as bound volumes* or microfiche/microfilm). I'd be super-super surprised if there was any legal issue to doing that.

* For pop-culture example, see Back to the Future 2: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=GfmdW3hiu8w.
1 comments
roenxi 1147 days ago
I was also surprised. Australia has a long tradition to community choirs. Most cultures do, in fact.

If people are destroying the last copy of something, copyright was probably involved. That is what copyright does; stops people creating copies of things. Otherwise there'll be some eccentric acting as an archivist - look how hard the content creators have to fight to stop their work being publicly recorded on the internet. The system is designed to stop the sort of people who do that, which absolutely includes library archivists. They'll be in the crosshairs of some lobbyist.

link
tivert 1147 days ago
> If people are destroying the last copy of something, copyright was probably involved.

I think you're trying to inject a copyright angle without any kind of evidence it's significant in this scenario. And it doesn't apply: https://guides.library.oregonstate.edu/copyright/libraries.

I think (at least when it comes to public libraries), there are also other factors at play. For instance: a frequent self-understanding that they're not an archive (which is only somewhat true), and a motivation to "serve their customers" by focusing on "popular" services, and a misunderstanding of what the internet is.

link
roenxi 1147 days ago
And yet, by the magic of there being only one way it could happen, the day that someone destroys the last copy of the microfilm will be because copyright prevented the people who wanted from keeping a copy from doing so.

It isn't like there is any shortage of people thinking that sort of record is worth preserving. Lots of people do. There is a shortage of people legally aloud to make copies. Because, as mentioned, copyright.

link