I don't think SoundCloud is an entity with some optimistic face you could approach and convince through reason or merit.
I expect they, like any business, would take a stance primarily based on liability, cost, benefit, etc... overriding how anyone working at the company actually feels about it.
It costs them nothing to ignore/outright reject without consideration a crazy proposal like "lets give our entire database of content to a third party". Assessing the technical and legal ramifications of that proposal costs time/effort/money. Why bother?
If SoundCloud gives their content to Archive Team, they're shouldering the possibility of some kind of liability, surely. If they say nothing, let Archive Team take it themselves, from their website, they let Archive Team (who understand and are willing to) take responsibility for that.
I expect they, like any business, would take a stance primarily based on liability, cost, benefit, etc... overriding how anyone working at the company actually feels about it.
It costs them nothing to ignore/outright reject without consideration a crazy proposal like "lets give our entire database of content to a third party". Assessing the technical and legal ramifications of that proposal costs time/effort/money. Why bother?
If SoundCloud gives their content to Archive Team, they're shouldering the possibility of some kind of liability, surely. If they say nothing, let Archive Team take it themselves, from their website, they let Archive Team (who understand and are willing to) take responsibility for that.