Reminder: nobody is trying to stop the Internet Archive from existing as an archive. A number of authors *did* object when it did the virtual equivalent of taking a book from its shelves, photocopying it, binding those copies, and handing them out under a large "FREE BOOKS" sign. https://twitter.com/internetarchive/status/1358090982189719552

If a physical library was doing this, authors would be pissed off with them as well. The Digital Archive is highly respected, but that doesn't mean it has special rights over authors' work, or can act in ways that no other archival library would ever dream of doing.

"But Project Gutenberg..." Project Gutenberg *already exists* for out of copyright books. The Internet Archive is being sued for giving away copies of books that are current and still in the active earning period for authors - ie the ones that are feeding their families.

"But Sci-Hub..." Sci-Hub is combatting a particularly niche area of publishing, where a small number of journals gatekeep *all* scientific papers and use their monopoly to extort huge access fees, hindering vital scientific research. NOT the same as bagging a new novel for free.

"But Big Publishing..." A lot of authors would agree that there are many things awry in the world of publishing, and would love to see it improve. However "Your industry is problematic and so you should work for free" is not the killer anti-capitalist argument you think it is.

"But low income readers..." deserve more than this, and need people to pay more attention to the structural inequalities keeping them poor, and throw their energy into fighting those instead. "Here's a free stolen ebook" isn't that far off "Let them eat cake" in this context.

If you want to help low income people access more books, fight for higher minimum wages. Fight for brick-and-mortar libraries, which provide ebook loans which *do* benefit authors, and provide so many other vital community services besides.

Hell, help libraries fight publishers for better ebook lending deals, so they can afford to lend out more copies without ripping off authors. Fight for a genuinely fully liveable Universal Basic Income, because guess what, that helps most authors too. Because, relatedly...

"But copyright shouldn't exist, all art should be free!" Plenty of authors might agree with you, if they could... but turns out, they still gotta eat. Randomly giving away other people's books for free without covering that need (hello again UBI) limits who can afford to write.

If you're advocating a system that means authors can't reap the royalties from their works *without first bringing in another way to support them financially* you're advocating for a world in which only the privileged can afford to be writers. Rich white dude lit... forever.

Finally, a reminder: Chuck Wendig was made the face of the anti-AI lawsuit because he was already Angry Online White Dude's public enemy number one for suggesting the Star Wars universe needed more women, LGBT+ and PoC. If you're demonising him for this, check your bedfellows.