That not unlimited people can rent the same title at the same time is probably a licensing issue (as they only purchases x copies for lending).
The DRM in this case is mostly about the time limit on the rental though. If you would get access to the title indefinitely it would be giving away not renting?
The whole project is about preserving information for current and future generations, so what place does limiting the availability of it have in history? It’s more likely it’ll just be lost due to DRM when no one can figure it out in the future. It’s the digital equivalent of losing the books, though due to someone being more concerned about their pocket book today than for future generations.
Would you prefer that the Internet Archive not make these books available at all? That was likely the alternative possibility.
I assume that the Internet Archive is holding onto the original, DRM-Free master copies. That's a job I trust the Internet Archive with, even if ideally I wish the data was more distributed.
I would actually, because it sets a bar that if you’d like your book to be preserved then you need to make a choice, is your book so valuable that it should be free? If not, there’s plenty of other places for DRM books. What they’re doing instead is trying to have it both ways.
They are having it both ways. A non-encrypted copy is preserved digitally within the Internet Archive, and that copy is made available, now, in the only way it legally can be. Once that copyright expires, the Archive can make the content freely available to all, having already been digitized.
In some cases the content doesn't belong to the person restricting it however, they're effectively copyrighting the digital medium, do you think that's right for them to DRM it?
> In some cases the content doesn't belong to the person restricting it however, they're effectively copyrighting the digital medium, do you think that's right for them to DRM it?
No, I don't think it's right for a separate entity to usurp this kind of authority, but that's not really a battle the Internet Archive can win.
They are doing their best within the restrictions placed on them. If you'd like to lobby for more sane copyright laws, please go ahead, I'll be behind you 100%. That does not negate the good being done by the Internet Archive right now.
The DRM in this case is mostly about the time limit on the rental though. If you would get access to the title indefinitely it would be giving away not renting?