Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

YouTube-dl has received a DMCA takedown from RIAA

github.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

221–230 of 1001 posts

Re: YouTube-dl has received a DMCA takedown from RIAA

#221

Post by vongomben »

mig39 wrote: post #213
adrianmonk wrote: post #197

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Also, does the fact that YouTube doesn't supply a download feature constitute a "technical protection measure"? From the RIAA's point of view, it works to their benefit that a download link doesn't exist, and it may be something they like, but that doesn't mean that's why. It could just as easily be that a download feature doesn't exist because YouTube wants you to keep returning to their site if you want to rewatch…

Youtube does have a "download" feature in YouTube studio. Where you can download a heavily compressed version of any video you've uploaded. But only videos you've uploaded.

IANAL IANAT yet the video I am watching isn't being stored in my browser?

Re: YouTube-dl has received a DMCA takedown from RIAA

#222

Post by curtis3389 »

pengaru wrote: post #175

Considering youtube-dl isn't doing anything a web browser accessing these sites can't do, essentially serving as a headless web browser with a convenient CLI, I don't see how this could possibly have a leg to stand on. It's like serving Mozilla a DMCA takedown for FireFox. I however welcome the highly visible reminder that github should only be used as a mirror at most.

Someone should issue DMCAs for the Chromium and Firefox repos. Fight fire with fire.

Re: YouTube-dl has received a DMCA takedown from RIAA

#223

Post by thaumasiotes »

eli wrote: post #165
CivBase wrote: post #99

> this seems outrageous the same way DMCA'ing a Bittorrent client would be Why stop there? I can use my browser to illegally download content, so I guess we better issue a DMCA takedown that too. But who even needs a browser? Let's issue a takedown for the GNU Project while we're at it because I could use wget to do the same thing. In fact, I could write my own program to illegally download content, so we better just…

DMCA is a bad law, but you'd have a harder time arguing a general purpose web browser meets any of the following conditions: https://www.law.cornell.edu/uscode/text/17/1201 (2)No person shall manufacture, import, offer to the public, provide, or otherwise traffic in any technology, product, service, device, component, or part thereof, that— (A)is primarily designed or produced for the purpose of circumventing a techn…

Can you argue that youtube-dl meets any of those conditions?

You can argue that youtube-dl facilitates making copies of copyrighted works; that's easy. But the items A, B, and C that you quote all require circumventing a technological measure that controls access to a protected work. And youtube videos, in the general case, have completely uncontrolled access. You can't circumvent measures that don't exist.

Re: YouTube-dl has received a DMCA takedown from RIAA

#224

Post by jaspergilley »

yamrzou wrote: post #215
aquova wrote: post #139

While its good to get a backup of the source code, youtube-dl is one of those projects that quickly becomes useless as Google mixes stuff around within YouTube, which they like to do. Without an active developer base, the project will quickly become less and less effective, which is one of the big concerns IMO about this lawsuit.

What if collaboration on opensource projects (i.e. hosting, issues and their comments) was decentralized instead of relying on a central entity like Github? That would keep the developer base active and make DMCA takedowns ineffective.

In light of this DMCA, this seems like a site that needs to exist...but I don't know of one? Seems like as trivial a build as anything cryptographic actually

Re: YouTube-dl has received a DMCA takedown from RIAA

#225

Post by toyg »

hexo wrote: post #188

As we can see again having github as a sole distribution mechanism was a bad idea. I hope they have backups and will be back online soon.

YouTube-dl is actually in pypi and other places, GitHub is not the sole distributor. However, it is their sole development hub, as far as I can see, and that should change. After all, Git is distributed by nature. I suspect they’ll have to investigate a bunch of those new tools that try to do issue-tracking on top of pure git, and the main developers will have to go underground. It’s DeCSS all over again.

Re: YouTube-dl has received a DMCA takedown from RIAA

#226

Post by mmaunder »

CivBase wrote: post #99

> this seems outrageous the same way DMCA'ing a Bittorrent client would be Why stop there? I can use my browser to illegally download content, so I guess we better issue a DMCA takedown that too. But who even needs a browser? Let's issue a takedown for the GNU Project while we're at it because I could use wget to do the same thing. In fact, I could write my own program to illegally download content, so we better just…

This logic could have been used to outright ban dual cassette tape decks in the 80s.

Why not ban the pen, since it can be used to hand copy books. RIAA needs to stay in their lane.

Re: YouTube-dl has received a DMCA takedown from RIAA

#229

Post by proffan »

karmasimida wrote: post #108

I am not buying this. Does this mean bittorrent client can be taken down as well? Who is drawing the line here?

IMHO the biggest problem here is the US government is policing the world with DMCA: you have to comply even you are not with physical US jurisdiction. Like the world's biggest cyber-troll, just dressed in business suits.

Re: YouTube-dl has received a DMCA takedown from RIAA

#230

Post by caleb-allen »

topkai22 wrote: post #130
boogies wrote: post #56

Hope this motivates a few more free software devs to move away to a free host, at least apart from GH mirrors for exposure. IUUC importing this to GitLab would have taken ~½dozen clicks and saved the open issues, etc.?

GitLab also has to comply with DMCA complaints. A quick search brought up their procedure: https://about.gitlab.com/handbook/engineering/security/opera... They'll still take down a repo and block the user if it is hosted. And self hosting something isn't free, plus quite possibly puts more legal exposure on the team. This isn't a problem with technologies or the platform. There fundamentally needs to be a narrowing o…

What about https://sr.ht?
Post reply on HN