• @[email protected]
    link
    fedilink
    English
    59
    edit-2
    1 month ago

    It’s like Lenin said, you look for the person who will benefit… And, uh… You know, you’ll, uh… You know what I mean.

    The Dude

    „Who benefits the most” from attacking Internet Archive? Big copyright holders whose content was distributed via Internet Archive. The reason given by the group claiming responsibility is so silly I don’t believe it.

    [edit] I’ll add to this comment so that I don’t have to reply to everyone specifically.

    I don’t believe that if you wanted to attack USA (as people claiming responsibility did) you’d attack it in a way that benefits big corporations most. It sounds like a flimsy distraction from true perpetrators.

    • @pivot_root
      link
      English
      121 month ago

      You can believe what you want, but there’s absolutely no way you would be correct. Any large company sponsoring a cyber attack, if caught, would be nailed to the wall and made an example of. The extreme risks are simply not worth the comparatively small reward of reducing a tiny fraction of piracy.

      A more realistic and reasonable avenue would have been to sponsor the companies going after IA for copyright infringement as a result of them loaning out unlimited digital copies of books without DRM.

      • @[email protected]
        link
        fedilink
        English
        131 month ago

        This is a very valid point, yet companies do shady stuff all the time and some even get caught via subpoenas and such. Nintendo can do it in a way that will never be noticeable on their books for sure.

    • @[email protected]
      link
      fedilink
      English
      51 month ago

      For those curious, this account on Xitter claimed responsibility. Their stated reasons are indeed ridiculous, but I don’t at all have a hard time believing that people can be that misguided.