Hacker News new | ask | show | jobs
by cute_boi 1 day ago
Forget publishing, companies like misanthropic are buying rare books and destroying it.

[1] https://arstechnica.com/ai/2025/06/anthropic-destroyed-milli...

2 comments

When they do this, are they buying a single copy of say Book A and destroying a single Book A copy? Or are they buying every copy they can find of Book A and destroying all of them?
Hi, shredding the book is to reduce potential legal liability of format shifting - if you shred the book after scanning, the theory is you are not increasing the number of copies. This has come up as a factor in legal rulings. The legality of format shifting is still murky though, and the legality of training on the work are a separate question.
Elon recently (2d) tweeted about making sure they preserve rare books and "scan them the hard way". That tweet launched a cultural wave of opposition regarding the debinding of rare books.

The discussion has been around, but it's flared significantly recently. Not sure if that's what the person you're responding to is specifically inflamed about.

Regardless, old/rare books are certainly being acquired and destroyed.

No, he didn't tweeted about "making sure" of anything.

Elon tweeted "I’ve asked the SpaceXAI team to preserve any rare books in a library and scan them the hard way vs just cutting off the spine and scanning"

which is no sense a credible source for what he actually asked SpaceXAI team to do, or if they are doing it, or what they were doing before yesterday. Elon has an extremely long and thorough track record of lying.

https://xcancel.com/elonmusk/status/2081844165881594362

Sure, I'm ambivalent to his veracity.

The problem remains either way. Small operations around the globe are debinding rare/unique books. I'm involved with an organization considering (not strongly) that exactly.

What do you mean?
To scan them, they usually have to resort breaking them into individual pages.
Note it doesn't have to, it's just faster to.

Internet Archive scans their books one page at a time keeping the book intact and stored in a warehouse.

They do: the judge in the Anthropic case said that destroying them means that the text is being transferred, and so therefore can be fair use.

> "The print original was destroyed. One replaced the other."

(I believe the reasoning is that the author is not being financially disadvantaged by more copies of their book existing).

So the current law prefers them to destroy.

Rare books seldom are under copyright and that’s not a concern then.
Is that easy to tell for each book, though?

I usually hear that it's extremely hard to track down the copyright owners for many older things. That's the reason the film/video industry often gives for not digitising the backlog online, and I would expect their volume to be much easier to handle than the book industry.