Could what.cd have been considered an archive for copyright purposes?

I've been doing research into the history and demise of what.cd. If you don't know what what.cd is, it was a private bittorrent tracker that lasted for about 10 years. I find it fascinating:

- what.cd likely held the most complete digital archive of music in all of human history, surpassing any real world library archive.

- The rules of what.cd ensured high quality, bit perfect reproductions with checksum logs of the rips.

- Members of what.cd likely purchased as many, or more CDs as they downloaded, as the rules required this to remain a member.

It seems like the net cultural effects of what.cd far exceeds the economical cost. It was essentially a small club of digital archivists. If I was a librarian, it would make me very sad that it shut down and so much information was lost, likely forever. It's almost like the burning of the Great Library of Alexandria.

Given all that, would a system like what.cd be able to survive legally today, if it was defended as an archival/library? Can libraries be crowdsourced?