They don't even respect robots.txt. So content creators can't even opt out of that. Not that copyright would have copyright holders having to opt out of copying in the first place.
How have they not been sued out of existance yet?
Copyright law specifically allows for libraries and archives to make copies of copyrighted material.
Without such laws, without libraries, knowledge could not be guaranteed to be shared freely among the public, resulting in ever growing knowledge and education gaps between those with means and those without.
Edit: Since you asked for the legal ground, here it is specifically:
https://www.law.cornell.edu/uscode/text/17/108
And here’s is further discussion by the copyright office itself:
https://www.copyright.gov/policy/section108/discussion-docum...
Congress and the copyright office have made it an important part of copyright law to protect archival, library and fair use doctrine.
I don’t think it’s helpful to flag things people disagree with, as long as they don’t attempt to spread misinformation, or trolling etc. The parent phrased the topic as a question, meaning I believe they were open to understanding.
I also think it’s relative to the topic posted, as we’re talking about either an attack on archive.org, or a massive recopying of archive data by an unknown.
Talking to people with opposing views is important. Let’s not just shut people down if we don’t agree with something, especially when someone is asking a question.
Since archive.org have now updated that the problem scraper is now evading countermeasures and bringing them down repeatedly, and has been identified as an "AI" company, it could end up being an existential risk: if companies start using archive.org as a large-scale commercial IP theft proxy, they will likely face even more legal challenges than they already do.
That said, personally I do use Wayback machine about once a month for genuine search of historic content.