[Chris2048]

Your own original had the same problem, so let me play it straight; I don't think there is a legal issue, let alone a clear one.

You don't think phrasing like "There's a thing called 'copyright'", as if I'm not aware of what copyright is, isn't condescending?

Now, either of you relate that concept to a suggestion that HN link to archive.org

[fuzzer371]

> You don't think phrasing like "There's a thing called 'copyright'", as if I'm not aware of what copyright is, isn't condescending?

No, not really. You just seem to be trying to pick a fight.

[Chris2048]

Yes, really. Not the first time you've hopped on a thread to make a bad call coupled with a personal insinuation:

https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=43966385

[pgwhalen]

I'm not interested in having a debate on the legality of it which is why I said "legally questionable." It doesn't strike me as implausible that you wouldn't know what copyright is, if you don't accept the premise that linking to the internet archive for any and all paywalled contemporary content is at least legally questionable.

[Chris2048]

> if you don't accept the premise that ... is at least legally questionable.

The premise was that this is so obvious that my naivety is funny. But no, you don't want to debate that point - Why would you care to consider otherwise, it's not you losing face if correct.

Here's an uninvited counterpoint anyway:

https://blog.archive.org/2024/03/01/fair-use-in-action-at-th...

You'll also notice that the link in this post (https://archive.is/TajtJ) shows a 'log in' button, implying that log-in credentials where not used (or abused) to get/share this snapshot.