Hacker News Reader

That keeping the physical copy intact would mean creating a copy, and they don’t have the copy right.

I see the reasoning. I don't like or agree with it though but thank you for explaining it.

I think it shouldn't be illegal unless you give the copy to someone else.

You are describing “piracy”. The laws against copyright violation are what require both the destruction of the book, and not distributing it.

The whole thing is exceptionally stupid, and really, they should just download the archive copy of Anna’s archive (which is what the Chinese are doing, and what US labs were doing)

Who is “they”, you think, if not the Chinese or US labs?

Anna’s Archive still doesn't have everything — I suspect all these books described are not in this great dataset.

Isn't the "copyright" meant to prevent someone else other than the creator taking advantage of the material?

Greatly simplified: The copyright protects distribution of the material. Once they sell it, they can't keep me from taking advantage of it, except in regards to creating additional copied for distribution. I can, for example, quote it in a critique and distribute that for profit since I have transformed the original work into a new work.

Reply on news.ycombinator.com