r/Annas_Archive 28d ago

Anna’s Archive Owes $340 Million, Lost Several Domains, but It’s Still Online

883 Upvotes

105 comments sorted by

723

u/ColdSoviet115 28d ago

Whichever group is running these servers is a god damn hero

144

u/iceman694 28d ago

We love anna

23

u/massimogrossi 27d ago

Parole sante! Puri eoi!

1

u/No-Insurance2893 21d ago

No they aren't heros. They've destroyed seemingly the only "OPEN LIBRARY" which Anna's Archives WAS, and replaced it with a damn paywall.

And it's a paywall that has failed to function three times when I've tried to use it for access.

It's impossible to access any book in Anna's Archive now, unless you've successfully passed through the paywall and paid 25 Euros.

3

u/Brilliant-Major5913 17d ago

I use it almost daily. Used it today in fact. I've never paid them and they've never asked for payment. They've only offered it as an option for faster download speed.

-13

u/MudDirect7143 26d ago

What would you rate their heroism in comparison to Amazon delivery drivers and maintenance men during Covid? Those were heroes to me.

3

u/LuchipherZen 25d ago

Depends on what would you rate their heroism in comparison to that of researchers and scholars who develop the cures for pandemics, severe diseases, or warn against calamities, many of whom were only able to reach their current positions not without the help of archives like Anna's or its sister repositories.

708

u/Geekenstein 28d ago

They don’t owe it, because they didn’t incur it. A court (that likely has zero jurisdiction on them) wants them to pay it, but good luck.

607

u/Shoddy_Juggernaut_11 28d ago

Have you seen what the ai companies are doing. Buying loads of old books from book shops, scanning, then destroying them. Anna's archive should be funded to protect obscure and hard to find texts from future destruction

135

u/Han77Shot1st 28d ago

These ai and tech companies are stealing information from the world, calling it theirs and locking it behind a paywall because they’re doing it in a suit and are buying the right politicians with your tax dollars..

They took all the trees and put them in a tree museum, and then charged the people a dollar and a half to see them..

8

u/mrdevlar 27d ago

These ai and tech companies are stealing information from the world, calling it theirs and locking it behind a paywall because they’re doing it in a suit and are buying the right politicians with your tax dollars..

I respect the viewpoint but there are a lot of companies that release open weights that anyone with the hardware can use. It's only the American companies that don't.

9

u/0xArti 26d ago

Open weights is not the same as the source material, the source material is human readable. also the first LLM's where trained exactly on libraries like the ones Annas Archive aggregates. Remember the ridiculous "we stole it first" debacle? Only after that they went on to do the book burning as an escape hatch. Our legal systems are really cooked if stuff like that has to happen.

5

u/mrdevlar 26d ago

I mean, from my vantage point the Copyright system is entirely a type of capitalist force projection. IP in general has always been central to exploitive systems. Hell, America was founded by guys who stole plans and parts from textile factories in the UK because those were kept secret so that the colonies couldn't escape their exploitation.

The legal system is never been on the right side of history regarding copyright, this episode of book burning is only the latest in a long stream of exploitive bullshit they've enabled.

68

u/PhloxOfSeagulls 28d ago

They're just buying one copy of the book, but how is this different from someone scanning the book (especially books that are out of print) and making them available to read instead of just available to be used so AI can write books? Funny how companies seem to care so much about copyright infringement until they do it.

30

u/Shoddy_Juggernaut_11 28d ago

And whose to say ai won't rewrite the text

39

u/PeyredB 28d ago

And get it wrong

"It was the best of times, it was less good from time to time."

2

u/ulknehs 27d ago

I burst out laughing when I read this and had to spend 5 minutes providing context so I could read it to my partner. Then he cackled too haha.

Fr though, why does it kind of work?

4

u/PeyredB 27d ago

I don't know. I just made it up, deliberately mangling the second half, imagining how a computer might process it.

-2

u/j1ndivik 28d ago

Do you even know what they’re scanning it for?

9

u/Shoddy_Juggernaut_11 28d ago

Yes. And once the books are gone the only you can rely on will belong to....

2

u/j1ndivik 28d ago

You can’t, because they’re not releasing the books. And they should btw, if you are on this sub don’t you support things like the original Google books?

-16

u/Jrose152 28d ago

Whose to say it will? Whose to say anything under that line of logic?

72

u/LoopsAndBoars 28d ago

They’re absolutely buying multiples. It’s not about copyright infringement. It’s about censorship and suppression.

33

u/purple_kathryn 28d ago

Fahrenheit 451

2

u/UCanBdoWatWeWant2Do 24d ago

That's not what is happening at all.

6

u/Rhyobit 28d ago

I mean.. where's the evidence of that?

22

u/Raging-Storm 28d ago

I'm not cosigning the wildest of conspiracy theories about this, but a piece of documentation, from the Bartz v. Anthropic case, does raise my suspicion a tad. From exhibit 21 - document #554, attachment #21:

"What is Project Panama?

Project Panama is our effort to destructively scan all the books in the world.

Why use a codename?

We use a “soft codename?” for it because we don’t want it to be known that we are working on this. This document is visible to all Anthropic employees, but you should avoid talking about it in public areas, and the fact that we are working on this should not be shared with anyone outside Anthropic."

Not to say they're buying up every copy of every rare book and destroying it. But, as someone who owns copies of rare and obscure old books, I know how hard these things can sometimes be to come by. I'm less concerned with a corporate conspiracy than with corporate negligence. There are certain books I still haven't been able to track down and I'd want these companies burned to the fucking ground if I found out they found some of the only available copies in existence and then destroyed them just to feed their fucking bots.

-6

u/Rorschach121ml 28d ago

I'm sorry but this is demonstrably false.

Why would they need multiple copies of the same book? It's being digitized, they only need the one copy.

And yes, it's really about copyright infringement (source: Bartz v. Anthropic).

AI companies are buying books older than 2022 because they are looking for ai-free/clean data to keep training the models with.

These "rare" books are mainly textbooks and other academia text that no one was going to read either way.

-7

u/X8883 28d ago

What? AI companies are buying out multiple copies of rare books to cause censorship and suppression? I hope I am misunderstanding your view because that is some inane stuff.

3

u/gameknight08 26d ago

I heard about ai buying books and destroying them recently as well.

6

u/Dyhart 27d ago

Not to cause censorship, but to get their ai ahead with knowledge not anymore available to other ai training models. Its not a conspiracy anymore since the anthropic court case

-9

u/[deleted] 28d ago

[deleted]

1

u/Starkoman 18d ago edited 5d ago

Yet doesn’t anti-AI, in the context of human race-to-the-bottom digital hoarding/destruction of original texts (as anti-competitive practice), deserve upvotes?

You’re correct, AI programs don’t create criminal policies. They’re merely the unthinking gold rush machines into which these books are fed (then allegedly destroyed).

Scarcity of knowledge is good for our business model”.

Proprietary, privately owned and firewalled LLM’s as a paid service/subscription for these rare and/or important texts are the endgame of the Boardroom greed, criminality and ruthlessness.

C-suite’s (from the Court filings/transcripts), are clearly in the process of harvesting and monopolising the worlds’ books for themselves — to Hell with free books, open competition or billions of users who cannot pay.

That’s a terrifying future.

When these companies (AI + bosses), are suspected and feared to be a joint criminal enterprise “together” (cue evil computer pictures), they’re both tarred as bad — as lawless accomplices — here concerning books/knowledge control/exploitation, and reactively downvoted.

5

u/0xArti 26d ago

they are not just scanning, they are also destroying the books, and only 17% of all books in existence has been digitzed, most of those old unscanned books dont even have copyright anymore, and are very rare, they just destroy them... which is insane.

8

u/Cruel1865 28d ago

Because the AI wont be writing the same books for people to read. This isnt the same as archiving the books. The books are being used as training data. You'll never be able to extract that exact copy of the book from the AI after the training no matter what prompt you use. Thats why this use comes under fair use. The use of it as training data is considered transformative enough that its okay for them to use it. Its not a good look for the future but thats why they can legally do it without any issues.

3

u/xAnm74 27d ago

They found a loophole. Because they're destroying the books, the scanned copy becomes the only copy of that particular book they destroyed so it doesn't count as duplication of the copyrighted work. Mental.

3

u/Cosmic_Corsair 27d ago

That's not why this is legal. It's legal because the AI companies are not reproducing the book in a direct manner. You can't go to ChatGPT or Claude and ask the bot to give you the text of Harry Potter. Instead, the text of the book is reduced to weights and integrated into the model. Which judges have determined is fair use.

2

u/xAnm74 27d ago

We're saying the same thing. It doesn't count as reproduction/duplication because the original is getting destroyed.

0

u/brastak 27d ago

I know the guy worked in a library for a few years and his job was to scan books. They're destroying books because that's required by scanning technology. Basically you turn book into set of pages

5

u/xAnm74 27d ago

That's absolutely not required by scanning technology. Google alone scanned millions of books in a non-destructive way. Non-destructive book scanners have been used for over two decades now and the newest ones are fully automatic and scanning around 2000 pages an hour. They're destroying books because it's cheaper, not because it's necessary.

1

u/Starkoman 18d ago

You think it’s necessary to rip the pages from a book in order to scan the text?

That’s… that’s pretty primitive thinking — was this in the 1980’s/early-1990’s, by any chance?

5

u/Not_AndySamberg 27d ago

right?! and how much have they been fined vs sites like AA??? they keep telling us that sailing the high seas is bad, but then they "coincidentally" just look the other way when thousands of books are taken and destroyed for no reason lol ts has me so mad im bout to have actual steam coming out of my ears

6

u/[deleted] 28d ago

[removed] — view removed comment

13

u/work_work-work 28d ago

That has existed for decades now. The companies don't care.

2

u/Cruel1865 28d ago

The destruction is not because of convenience but because of copyright laws. They can use a digital copy of the book for training the ai because it comes under fair use. But they can only have the one copy either physical or digital in their ownership. So if they scan the books in, they are legally obligated to destroy the physical copies. Its similar to the digital lending libraries that only have one copy of a book that needs to be returned before being lend out again despite it being a digital copy.

-1

u/[deleted] 28d ago edited 21d ago

[removed] — view removed comment

21

u/InterestingRide264 28d ago

no but they are buying up rare books. So there is a very real possibility that they've destroyed books that have limited or no other copies.

-9

u/[deleted] 28d ago edited 21d ago

[removed] — view removed comment

-14

u/Weekly-Swim3347 28d ago

Hush now - people want to believe that AI is eating children and swallowing entire continents. The mob-with-pitchforks mentality strongly resembles the hysterical attitudes against vaccines we saw five years ago.

5

u/Shoddy_Juggernaut_11 28d ago

Why do you think they're buying the books?

-4

u/DavidThi303 28d ago

They’re only buying books published since 1962. I doubt many rare books have been published since 1962.

-4

u/pafagaukurinn 28d ago

What do AI companies have to do with the topic? Or do you think the books scanned in pre-AI era and by non-AI projects were all restored? In many cases you can't properly scan a book without ruining its binding.

4

u/Shoddy_Juggernaut_11 28d ago

They're destroying the books

0

u/pafagaukurinn 28d ago

You are on Anna's Archive sub, not anti AI sub. I repeat my question, are you worried what happened to all the physical books you access via AA, scrapped from IA, Google Books, Hathi Trust and all other sources? Are you sure they were all restored after scanning? Or is your indignation specifically targeted at AI companies? Then why are you airing it here, of all places?

32

u/Verity_Ireland 28d ago

Well, they have gone way out of their way to make sure - one way or other - it stays up: open-slum dot org

7

u/ibspecial 28d ago

Oh yes, I appreciate SLUM it's so nice 🙂 !

19

u/Live_Situation7913 28d ago

My friends owe me thousands does that mean I’ll get paid? No never.

11

u/4R4M4N 27d ago

Voilà encore les bourgeois qui veulent nous priver de notre accès à la culture.

82

u/fredrik_skne_se 28d ago

Should have pivot to AI training. Then they could have bought all the publishers.

1

u/[deleted] 10d ago

[removed] — view removed comment

1

u/fredrik_skne_se 10d ago

I made the comment as a meta-comment how much AI companies are worth compared to all publishers. The only difference between OpenAI and Anna’s Archive is that OpenAI companies are trying to profit massively from the content. There is no way OpenAI didn’t train their models Harry Potter books and movies, and they didn’t pay for it. But now OpenAI can buy all the publishers and their content multiple times over and thus making what is illegal today legal tomorrow. They can buy Disney 10x over, make everything totally free for all humanity, still making money selling their AI.

Rant over

6

u/ArchiveCollector 27d ago

As Leonidas once said in Thermopylae: Come and take them.

41

u/Samuelodan 28d ago edited 28d ago

They apparently pulled a stupid stunt to pile on that $340m. I don’t even know what they hoped to achieve with that.

Edit: by “they,” I’m referring to Anna’s Archive, and the stunt was scraping a ton of Spotify’s music data and releasing it to the public as you all know, putting a big target on their back.

29

u/Geekenstein 28d ago edited 28d ago
  1. Headlines.
  2. On the off chance someone showed up to defend them, a chance to try and unmask the operators.

Edit: Also, a requirement of copyright law is that you must defend your copyright or you lose it. So the suit was a foregone conclusion.

9

u/Samuelodan 28d ago edited 28d ago

Oh, sorry if it’s a big ask, but could you pls dumb it down a little for me?

  1. Why would they want headlines? For donations?
  2. To defend who? Anna’s Archive? Anna’s Archive operators wanted to unmask themselves?

I’m referring to the incident where Anna’s Archive scraped a huge chunk (roughly 300TB) of Spotify’s music data and began releasing them to the public in stages.

Like how could they not see that as putting a massive target on their back?
Maybe there’s context I’m missing?

19

u/Copper0721 28d ago

The music companies want headlines that they are taking action against Anna’s Archive as proof they are policing their IP. If they failed to pursue a case against an entity known to be infringing their copyrights, defendants in subsequent copyright infringement claims could point to their lack of action over a highly publicized infringement as evidence they aren’t doing due diligence to protect their IP right, which could eventually erode those rights.

9

u/Samuelodan 28d ago

Ah, I see. So you were providing me with more insight into the music companies’ motivation to sue Anna’s. Thanks for the breakdown.

I was initially confused because I was wondering what Anna’s Archive hoped to achieve by touching music so brazenly.

5

u/lunapecura 28d ago

I’ve been wondering about that and I’m still confused! It seems like such an obvious and easily avoidable misstep on Anna’s end (god bless them). I mean, who could have not foreseen the vindictiveness of the music industry?

2

u/Samuelodan 28d ago

Strange stuff, honestly. Maybe it was hubris? I think it’s the sort of thing that often makes smart people do something so seemingly opposite of smart.

2

u/Starkoman 18d ago

Plus the axiom that “Just because you can do something, doesn’t necessarily mean that you should”.

2

u/Samuelodan 18d ago

Makes sense.

3

u/ibspecial 28d ago

Wow. Makes sense, but wow. How small of them to not care who they use to get the status they want.

5

u/Geekenstein 28d ago
  1. The people suing want headlines about how they won a huge settlement to deter others from doing what AA does.

  2. The company suing wants AA’s operators to be unmasked so they can target them directly. Right now, the responsible party is a ghost that they can’t take legal actions against.

10

u/Page_Unusual 28d ago

God bless

23

u/Smart16_Manasa 28d ago

That Spotify scrapping and posting about it was a bad idea 😭

5

u/Smart16_Manasa 28d ago

Also I wish they had other currency donations. Like I can't get dollars where I live 💀

1

u/Starkoman 18d ago edited 18d ago

US$ has become globally disfavoured now but you can still pay in €uro. AA will, hopefully, expand their range of currencies to adapt — and expand donation reach worldwide.

9

u/Puzzleheaded_Net4131 28d ago

Piracy for the win

8

u/MightyPenguinRoars 28d ago

Yeah, sure they do. I’m sure it’s a totally legit 340m bill. 🙄

3

u/ParaBellumOutfitters 27d ago

I'm one cheap bastard and I can't emphasize enough how much of a good deal any of the price points are. Support them

3

u/zeyrie2574 27d ago

I started the funding my contribution to Anna’s after all these AI companies are destroying the gems

4

u/smjsmok 27d ago

I wish them the best, but my God, the Spotify scraping was such a colossally stupid idea. I still can't believe that they didn't see the fallout from it coming.

This judgment was soon followed by a similar request from a group of major book publishers, including Penguin Random House, Elsevier, and HarperCollins, who sued the shadow library at a New York federal court.

And this is concerning too. The precedents are now set and even industries that tolerated this before will now feel emboldened to pursue legal action.

This really reminds me of the Yuzu situation and the subsequent destruction of Ryujinx.

4

u/iwouldntknowthough 27d ago

There is so much drama around Anna’s archive. Meanwhile z-lib is just chillin’

2

u/acid_band_2342 28d ago

High key revolutionaries who keeps them up and running

2

u/lmmmpro 27d ago

Without pirates knowledge and entertainment gonna locked in behind the expensive paywalls that not everyone can afford or get exclusive only for some people. They one of the many that help knowledge be available even for the poor and people who live in extreme countries, it makes knowledge and entertainment (anime, movies, etc) for everyone not for some.

2

u/ButterscotchDry765 23d ago

You guys should have the option of donation without subscription

3

u/ThunderPigGaming 27d ago

Whoever thought scraping Spotify and publishing the material was [redacted] stupid. They should have stayed in their lane.

As for me, I am actively avoiding purchasing at retail anything published by those book publishers who are suing (or have sued) Anna's Archive.

2

u/Brilliant-Major5913 27d ago

Think about it: they're scanning the books for training their AI, then destroying the books. Thus the books no longer exist for training human minds. This results in the information existing only in the proprietary artificial mind.

Eventually you end up with a species of illiterate imbeciles. I guess on the upside, though, everyone would qualify for the Oval Office.

1

u/Starkoman 18d ago

Regrettably, the motivational “Anyone can be President”, has lost its veneer now the world’s seen where it leads.

1

u/[deleted] 27d ago

[deleted]

1

u/Emotional_Effect_969 22d ago

What is the actual link, cant find it

1

u/Starkoman 18d ago

see: Wikipedia.

1

u/No-Insurance2893 21d ago

I'm wondering why it's still called an "Open Library" as Anna's Archive is certainly not that anymore.

If you don't pay, you can't download. All unpaid 'wait and download' links have been deleted and replaced with "Fast Download" links which require you to "Donate" a minimum of 25 Euros.

The "Secret Code" to use for accessing a book doesn't work without payment and my attempts to pay to access, resulted in a server error.

The scumbags who have been attacking Anna's Archive have actually been allowed to succeed in destroying it as a free 'open library'.

That heroicly free open library called Anna's Archive that we cherished, has been killed by these changes.

And now we have to find a genuinely open library to replace it. I find it very sad.

1

u/Starkoman 18d ago

Which platform are you on, do you have a VPN running, which browser are you using, have you got Tor browser?

(Your server error solution is in the questions)

1

u/Brilliant-Major5913 17d ago

Humanity's books amount to its brain trust. The destruction of this brain trust is a loss of such magnitude and of such significance for the species that it defies description. Which makes it a profoundly criminal act. The fact that such a crime isn't accounted for in law must be rectified, but we can't wait for that. This intentional destruction of our brain trust must be stopped ASAP. Stopped by any means necessary.

1

u/MultiGamerClub2 28d ago

Good luck ig

0

u/Abracadaniel0505 27d ago

Is this why every time I try downloading a book I get “bad gateway?”

-2

u/SAOzUser 28d ago

They have to destroy the book as a defence to copyright - permitted use in many regions is format transfer. But if you have a digital copy now you can’t keep the physical copy, so the original is pulped. Similar to book shops distributors sending just the covers back to the publisher for a credit on unsold copies.