301–310 of 1001 posts
Earlier quoted context omitted.
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.
keybase.io provide decentralized crypto solution, it's better to open source community to move on to such crypto soluion
Curious if anyone with legal expertise knows if this has legs? They say: > The clear purpose of this source code is to (i) circumvent the technological protection measures used by authorized streaming services such as YouTube, and (ii) reproduce and distribute music videos and sound recordings owned by our member companies without authorization for such use. But the "circumventing" is still accessing a stream the use…
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…
Yes, they have some sort of DRM, albeit a very weak one.
> 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…
cURL could be used to download pornography. Think of the children!
Suggesting people "think of the children" as they download porn is perhaps not the best advice.
> 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…
Earlier quoted context omitted.
I was thinking the same thing: The next step following this line of thinking would be trying to ban all torrent clients, because they CAN be used to download copyrighted material. This is crazy.
What about chromium? They should take that down as well, imagine what children can see using that thing. `curl`, `wget` as well as gitlab - massive offender, random number generators - one of the biggest offenders, any worst nightmare you can imagine can be produced by it!
> We also note that the source code prominently includes as sample uses of the source code the downloading of copies of our members’ copyrighted sound recordings and music videos, as noted in Exhibit A hereto. For example, as shown on Exhibit A, the source code expressly suggests its use to copy and/or distribute the following copyrighted works owned by our member companies IMHO this wasn't the best move, I mean... t…
Does anyone have a local copy of the repo? I’m curious when that particular mention was merged into the repo. Thought - It’s possible that someone in association with the RIAA made a code contribution that included that change for the purpose of creating evidence to file a DMCA.
See youtube_dl/extractor/youtube.py line 588 in HEAD.
Video was originally added in f7ab6cbe160afbba60537c7a830a4c65c6f0b3ea back in '13, to the file test/tests.json.
Not a lawyer, software guy working in licensing & copyright for 20+ years. Was paid for a few years to talk about this stuff with tech and publishing people. They're requesting the takedown under 17 U.S. Code § 1201 - Circumvention of copyright protection systems. [ https://www.law.cornell.edu/uscode/text/17/1201 ] It's a few paragraphs of the actual law at stake here. There's no much to it. Essentially, they're argu…
That's an excellent point. It seems like youtube-dl may have started as a tool primarily used for ripping music off YouTube, but it has grown into a tool that is used for so much more than that today (offline viewing of content, backups of freely licensed material, fair use such as extracting clips from videos, etc).
Given that no one is getting sued over this, at least not yet, perhaps it makes sense to not fight this and simply allow youtube-dl as it stands to be pulled and re-imagined as a new piece of software that is explicitly focused on the positive and legal use cases. If RIAA still wants to go after that software, the case against it would be far weaker than the current product that has "YouTube" in the name and explicitly references ripping copyrighted music in its source code.
I'm very scared by this. youtube-dl needs somewhat frequent updates as Google moves the youtube codebase around. I'm worried that the RIAA's next move, now that it's starting to get inconvenient to get youtube-dl, will be to make Youtube change in some way to make existing copies of youtube-dl no longer work. youtube-dl has been my primary way of getting videos since I learned about it. If the RIAA manages to kill it…
Do you have some sort of RMS-style setup? If so, I'm curious about your reasons for that and why mainstream browsers aren't an option for you
YouTube's web interface is basically useless for me on a slow link, not to mention it's incredibly obnoxious with all its recommendations and other unmanagable propaganda delivery.
Youtube-dl's ability to retrieve titles and descriptions without showing me anything else and before retrieving any video content alone make youtube's opaque hashed URLs usable for me.
> 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…
> 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 get rid of computers altogether. https://www.gnu.org/philosophy/right-to-read.en.html (1997)