Original youtube-dl repo which has been taken down and replaced with DMCA notice: https://github.com/ytdl-org/youtube-dl
YouTube-dl is now part of GitHub/dmca.git
81–90 of 332 posts
Re: YouTube-dl is now part of GitHub/dmca.git
#82Earlier quoted context omitted.
Taking down GitHub would instantly make millions of developers at thousands of companies unable to do their work.
Only for a few days, critically. GitHub may be the single source of truth, but it’s not the only copy of the data.
It will take far more than "a few days" to change GitHub-based workflows. Data loss is not the only way to lose productivity.
Re: YouTube-dl is now part of GitHub/dmca.git
#83I think the long term solution for this problem is the developers of open source software like the bit torrent client, youtube-dl and other similar software will have to host their code outside of the reach of DMCA regualation. That will usually mean something like Github like site hosted in Russia, China or some other bloc where DMCA does not apply. Right now, lots of users in the US scientific community use Scihub…
Relying on other countries can't ever be a long term solution.
That pirate bay and scihub are still around, that their authors are walking around freely, is a miracle that should not be taken for granted.
We need to work on fixing these problems in our own countries. We need to talk about the freedoms we care about, put a good brand to those freedoms and win popular attention and enshrine those freedoms into law. And build a society that depends on those freedoms so much that rolling them back would be unthinkable.
That would be an actual long term solution. It is hard but if we all contribute, we can do it. Probably.
Re: YouTube-dl is now part of GitHub/dmca.git
#84Earlier quoted context omitted.
IANAL, but as far as I recall, a site receiving a DMCA notice must immediately remove the stated content. The person who put the content up may then file a counter-notice, which, if uncontested may then be followed by reinstating the content. If contested, the process moves into the courtroom.
Correct. A company cannot not comply with a dmca takedown. When the law was written, the supposed safeguard against copyright holders filing tons of frivolous claims is that a counter claim can be pretty serious. Of course history has shown that this didn't work out as planned.
They can not comply if they wish, M$ just doesn't wish it.
Plus this is clearly out of scope.
Re: YouTube-dl is now part of GitHub/dmca.git
#85Earlier quoted context omitted.
And what should we ask for? There is stuff to complain about with the DMCA, but the core process is reasonable. Someone claims copyright infringement by a user, and the website takes the content down. The user claims no copyright infringement, the website restores the content. The website is immune from liability, the alleged copyright owner can settle things in court with the user if they want to.
> There is stuff to complain about with the DMCA, but the core process is reasonable. it absolutely is not in any way reasonable. you must take down the content without question and then, after filing a counter-notice wait 10-14 days minimum before it can be restored [1]: "After a counter notice has been received, a service provider must wait 10-14 days before they can reactivate the claimed infringing content." friv…
You must or they can take M$ to court, which M$ would crush RIAA.
Re: YouTube-dl is now part of GitHub/dmca.git
#86Earlier quoted context omitted.
Congratulations on making life difficult for other people. Tell that to the RIAA... It's funny to see the Streisand Effect happen with this one.
US copyright law has teeth for stuff like this. If the RIAA goes after the OP for statutory damages, he's basically fucked for life. And they love to make examples of people. Did everybody forget Kazaa and Limewire?
[deleted]
Re: YouTube-dl is now part of GitHub/dmca.git
#87Earlier quoted context omitted.
Just curious, why is this possible with an unmerged PR? Just a weird setup on GitHub's end?
It's due to how git works. In order for git tools to compare and otherwise work with two commits, both commits need to be in the same repo. If "forking" a repo on github really cloned it in their infrastructure, they'd require far more data. So all forks of a github repo point to the same repo, only with different branches. Note that git clone only clones the actually present branches of the upstream you point it to,…
This isn’t simply because of how Git works. You can configure Git to look in multiple places for repo objects. For whatever reason, the GitHub devs either didn’t know this, or they didn’t want to implement their forking and pull request systems this way.
As someone else mentioned, this may be an intentional design to make it simpler to implement pulling down remote PRs from the destination repo.
Re: YouTube-dl is now part of GitHub/dmca.git
#88Earlier quoted context omitted.
The history of that github repo shows that counterclaims would be listed in that particular repo, along with the original DMCA request. There is no PR for a counterclaim for youtube-dl as of this comment.
That's not good then. There were some concerns before that the project wasn't active anymore, so I hope it's not a sign of maintainers deciding to pull the plug.
I'm hoping the EFF helps them out with this case. They've tweeted in support of them[0] and its not unheard of for them to provide counsel for projects in these circumstances.
Re: YouTube-dl is now part of GitHub/dmca.git
#89Earlier quoted context omitted.
IANAL, but as far as I recall, a site receiving a DMCA notice must immediately remove the stated content. The person who put the content up may then file a counter-notice, which, if uncontested may then be followed by reinstating the content. If contested, the process moves into the courtroom.
That's pretty much it though. In all honesty, we need a GH alternative hosted outside the US, in any place where absurd laws like DMCA don't exist.
What we really need is a decentralised git forge using something like ActivityPub. We cannot keep relying on companies to host open content for us.
Re: YouTube-dl is now part of GitHub/dmca.git
#90Earlier quoted context omitted.
Microsoft is losing the good will they've worked so hard to rebuild. Microsoft employees, managers, Satya: do you see what you're doing? I love the direction you've taken over the past five years, but bowing to the RIAA and attempting to disrupt an innocuous tool are horrible decisions. It's a chilling note, and everyone involved in tech can hear it. Are you telling us Github is not a safe place to develop software a…
IANAL, but as far as I recall, a site receiving a DMCA notice must immediately remove the stated content. The person who put the content up may then file a counter-notice, which, if uncontested may then be followed by reinstating the content. If contested, the process moves into the courtroom.
This is not a DMCA notice; A DMCA notice requires the identification of claimed copyrighted content and this document does no such thing.
The document claims that youtube-dl is illegal for being able to download video and audio from YouTube but not for hosting copyrighted material in the repo or binary distributions. The RIAA is claiming youtube-dl is "circumventing DRM".