Of course not, do most people?
What are you referring to, that they will take things down only when a complaint is filed? That doesn't really speak to the quality of the archive that it's there in the first place.
What are you referring to, that they will take things down only when a complaint is filed? That doesn't really speak to the quality of the archive that it's there in the first place.
More broadly, archive.org does operate in a legally gray area. But by trying to be a comprehensive archive but providing straightforward mechanisms for rights holders to opt out (including retroactively)--and by being a non-profit that doesn't run advertising--they seem to strike a reasonable balance for most people.
The quality of the archive? Not archiving something because of copyright is what negatively affects the quality of an archive.