![](/static/66c60d9f/assets/icons/icon-96x96.png)
![](https://lemmy.ml/pictrs/image/d3d059e3-fa3d-45af-ac93-ac894beba378.png)
Ebooks have their convenience, and once in a while I’ll take a free one if offered, or pick them up cheap in a bundle.
But physical books capture my interest way better. More satisfying to hold and look at. Having a physical object around is a reminder to read. And paper books are better for tuning out distractions. If I try to read ebooks on a phone, tablet, or PC I can easily lose focus (though nice dumb-device readers are surely out there, I don’t have one).
Well said. Within the existing framework of copyright law, the emergency open library thing that got them sued seems obviously illegal, despite it being a good thing. What’s good and what’s legal don’t always line up.
The Internet Archive’s work is too important. The library portion (that does controlled digital lending of published books) is nice, but I wouldn’t be too hurt if it goes down. Regular public libraries can fill a lot of that role. But the archive itself is incredible, and losing that would be a huge shame.
Legally, I don’t know that admitting fault and saying sorry does much good, but it certainly isn’t surprising that they got into hot water here.