“Most notorious” illegal shadow library sued by textbook publishers - Previous efforts to unmask the people behind Libgen have failed.

submitted by neolib from arstechnica.com

all 4 comments
sorted by:
top
newinsightfulfun

[–]In-the-clouds 2 insightful - 1 fun2 insightful - 0 fun3 insightful - 1 fun -  (2 children)

I never heard of this library. https://libgen.gs/

I gave it a test, searching for one book, and it was not on their website. But the same search did uncover the book on another library:

https://annas-archive.org/

[–]neolib[S] 3 insightful - 1 fun3 insightful - 0 fun4 insightful - 1 fun -  (0 children)

Yeah, annas-archive.org is an archive of books from other libraries, including libgen:

Our mission is to archive all the books in the world (as well as papers, magazines, etc), and make them widely accessible. We believe that all books should be mirrored far and wide, to ensure redundancy and resiliency. This is why we’re pooling together files from a variety of sources. Some sources are completely open and can be mirrored in bulk (such as Sci-Hub). Others are closed and protective, so we try to scrape them in order to “liberate” their books. Yet others fall somewhere in between.

Libgen.rs 6,728,262 files 72.6 TB

https://annas-archive.org/datasets

[–]topiary2 2 insightful - 1 fun2 insightful - 0 fun3 insightful - 1 fun -  (0 children)

Libgen has been successful in finding textbooks that other places would sell for hundreds of dollars. Beyond that, the content is hit or miss

[–]KyleIsThisTall 1 insightful - 1 fun1 insightful - 0 fun2 insightful - 1 fun -  (0 children)

Textbooks are a acam