(单词翻译:单击)
Universal access to all knowledge was a dream of the early internet. It's an idea that Mr. Kahle has long championed.
让所有人都能获取知识是早期互联网的梦想。这也是卡利长期以来一直支持的理念。
As the United States lurched to a halt in March 2020, he saw an opportunity. The Internet Archive would be a temporary bridge between beleaguered readers and the volumes shut away in libraries and schools.
当美国在2020年3月突然陷入停顿（疫情封控）时，他看到了机会。互联网档案馆将成为临时桥梁，连接起被封控的读者与被深锁在图书馆和学校里的书籍。
It didn't turn out that way, not a bit -- the emergency library shut down in June 2020 -- and three years later Mr. Kahle remained angry and frustrated.
结果并不是这样，完全不是--紧急图书馆于2020年6月关闭--三年后，卡利仍然为此感到悲愤。
There was one bright spot. The Board of Supervisors of San Francisco had just passed a resolution in support of digital libraries and the Internet Archive. The resolution was largely symbolic, but the message was exactly the one that Mr. Kahle had been trying to get across without much success, particularly in court. It championed "the essential rights of all libraries to own, preserve and lend both digital and print books."
其中有一丝光明。旧金山监事会通过了一项支持数字图书馆和互联网档案馆的决议。该决议在很大程度上是象征性的，但它传达的正是卡利一直试图传达，但未能成功传达的信息，尤其是未能得到法院的认可。决议支持"所有图书馆拥有、保存和出借数字图书和纸质图书的基本权利"。
"Libraries came before publishers," the 62-year-old librarian said in a recent interview in the former Christian Science church in western San Francisco that houses the archive.
"图书馆先于出版商存在。"这位62岁的图书馆馆长最近在旧金山西部的前基督科学教堂接受采访时说，档案馆就设立于此。
"We came before copyright. But publishers now think of libraries as customer service departments for their database products." Librarians are custodians. Mr. Kahle has spent his career working in tech, but he wants the future to behave a little more like the past.
"我们先于版权存在。但出版商现在将图书馆视为其数据库产品的客服部门。"图书管理员成了看守者。卡利的职业生涯是在科技行业度过的，但他希望未来能更像过去。
"If I pay you for an e-book, I should own that e-book," he said. "Companies used to sell things. Media companies now rent them instead. It's like they have tentacles. You pull the book off the shelf and say, ‘I think I'll keep this,' and then the tentacle yanks it back."
"如果我付钱给你，买了一本电子书，那么我就应该拥有这本电子书，"他说，"过去，公司都是卖东西的。现在，媒体公司在出租东西。它们就像有触角一样。你把书从书架上拿下来，说‘我想留着这本书'，然后触角把书猛地拽了回去。"
Some necessary background here: When a physical book is sold, the "first sale" provision of copyright law says the author and publisher have no control over that volume's fate in the world.
这里补充一些必要的背景：当纸质书被出售时，版权法的"首次销售"条款规定，作者和出版商无法控制这本书在世界中的命运。
It can be resold, and they don't get a cut. It can be lent out as many times as readers demand. The information in the text flows freely through society without leaving a trace. Religions and revolutions have been built on this.
书可以被转售，而他们不能从中分利。读者想把这本书借出去多少次都可以。文本中的信息在社会中自由流动，不留痕迹。宗教和革命都曾建立在此之上。
Thanks to their digital nature, e-books are treated much differently. They can't be resold or given away. A library that wants to lend e-books must buy a license from the copyright holder.
由于电子书的数字化本质，人们对待电子书的方式有很大不同。电子书不能转售或赠送。想要借出电子书的图书馆必须从版权持有者那里购买许可。
These subscriptions can be limited to a number of reads, or by periods of a year or two. Everything is tracked. Libraries own nothing.
这些订阅许可会限制阅读次数，或有一至两年的时间限制。一切都被追踪。图书馆不拥有任何东西。
