Does anyone else get rubbed the wrong way by this sort of irreverent infringement? Even if you have zero concern for journalists’ copyrights, it puts this forum at risk.
Obviously, no user would be able to justify buying subscriptions to every publication linked from HN.
And if there was no paywall bypass, then HN couldn't link to it and it would get no HN traffic and no discussion on HN at all.
Allowing paywall bypass means the publication gets the HN traffic and discussion it wouldn't otherwise get, and the possibility of converting some of that traffic to subscribers who wouldn't otherwise subscribe.
For what it's worth, the owners/operators clearly don't think it puts this forum at risk, as the sharing of paywall bypass links is explicitly allowed/encouraged according to the guidelines and moderator comments.
And the very fact that the publications themselves allow bypass via certain referrers (e.g., Facebook) suggests they don't have a problem with it.
The other way of looking at it is that it can boost publication revenue... by driving more traffic
But we’re not talking about piracy here. If the publishers thought of it that way they’d block all access to archive sites.
Anyway, rather than a snarky dismissal like this, do you have a constructive suggestion for a solution that works well for everyone?
If the answer is “no paywalled sites on HN ever” please say so.
But if you have a more nuanced suggestion that would be a huge help!