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

YouTube-dl is now part of GitHub/dmca.git

github.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

231–240 of 332 posts

Re: YouTube-dl is now part of GitHub/dmca.git

#231

Post by brianush1 »

wizzwizz4 wrote: post #172
tdrgabi wrote: post #151

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Isn't that evidence for the case though? youtube-dl has code to see through obfuscation methods which are only available to specific YouTube partners. If you're a tool for downloading open, not copyrighted videos, why do you need that?

youtube-dl is not, strictly speaking, a downloading tool. It's an access tool. You want to access YouTube videos through an alternate client, as is your legal right in the European Union ? youtube-dl is a useful library for the job. You can use youtube-dl to download videos, but the intended use here is clearly for watching them. Just because syringe needles are tested on (and advertised for) human skin and are also…

> You want to access YouTube videos through an alternate client, as is your legal right in the European Union?

Do you have a source on this? I can't find anything about this through a quick Google search, but I'd love for this to be true.

Re: YouTube-dl is now part of GitHub/dmca.git

#232

Post by kortex »

dannyw wrote: post #92
Stephen304 wrote: post #19

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I might not be able to explain well, but from what I understand about how github works, when you fork someone else's repo, github only stores 1 tree but you have your own set of tags / branches. This led to an issue that was probably fixed where if you set a repo to private, anyone who had a clone could guess commit hashes from their fork's remote. Another interesting thing about git is that you can have 2 root commi…

This seems like a security issue, no?

Seems to me like you could ddos a repo this way, though I guess that would be true of any pr spamming?

Re: YouTube-dl is now part of GitHub/dmca.git

#233

Post by zaroth »

noxer wrote: post #196
bitwize wrote: post #150

Earlier quoted context omitted.

That just proves that Youtube-dl is intended to circumvent copyright protection measures. Those obfuscation measures count as "effective" for the purposes of the DMCA. Trafficking in software to circumvent them is a felony. GitHub and Microsoft could find themselves criminally liable if they do not take it down.

Take down chrome then its "intended to circumvent copyright protection measures" as you can clearly watch these youtube videos with chrome.

I would love to know the legal distinction between YouTube-dl and Chrome.

They are both obviously user agents used for accessing video content hosted on a public remote server using standard web protocols.

Then tell me how uBlock Origin is somehow Ok if YouTube-dl is not.

Re: YouTube-dl is now part of GitHub/dmca.git

#234

Post by justinclift »

anticensor wrote: post #210
justinclift wrote: post #102

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> outside of the reach of DMCA regualation. What's the latency to the Moon again? :)

2.5s is the minimum roundtrip. Add server and satellite hops and you get something closer to 3s minimum. Every time.

Thanks. Sounds like it'd be workable as a backup target then, but would probably suck being the primary place to grab source code.

That being said, maybe it would be ok as a primary location if there are more localised caches (eg lower response times) commonly available.

Re: YouTube-dl is now part of GitHub/dmca.git

#235

Post by m4rtink »

anticensor wrote: post #210
justinclift wrote: post #102

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> outside of the reach of DMCA regualation. What's the latency to the Moon again? :)

2.5s is the minimum roundtrip. Add server and satellite hops and you get something closer to 3s minimum. Every time.

Not a problem for Git or even PR workflow then.

Re: YouTube-dl is now part of GitHub/dmca.git

#237

Post by what-the-grump »

decasteve wrote: post #199
hnlmorg wrote: post #182

Earlier quoted context omitted.

You're trying very hard to make a technical distinction but the problem is that this is a legal problem not a technical one and rightly or wrongly, legal definitions don't always align with technical ones. For starters, intent is factored into the law. There's several different classifications of murder depending on intent. Likewise someone carrying a kitchen knife home, still packaged, from the shops is unlikely to…

> ...intent is factored into the law. What gets lost or missed is the underlying intent of the protocols and tools being used to share content. An http server serves files independent of the client/user-agent–that's how the web works. If a work is published this way then that's the expectation. If YouTube and the RIAA want it to work another way, then use a different protocol/medium and put the content behind a login…

Right, but even when offering free resources to the public you still maintain the manner in which they are accessed and distributed.

It's not as clear as let's say access to a public park on private land. But the idea would carry weight that youtube may control the manner in which their publicaly accessable website may be accessed.

Let's say you can access via the YouTube app which does not require an account, and now you reverse engineer that app to bypass the app all together. It's a bit like cutting a hole in the fence around the playground.

I'm not a fan of what happened it's just clear to me why it happened.

Re: YouTube-dl is now part of GitHub/dmca.git

#238

Post by kortex »

exabrial wrote: post #223

What bothers me about DMCA the most is the lack of due process. In the US, one would think more than any place else you have the right to a lengthy trial before have a right stripped away. Both political parties in the USA regularly chip away at our rights in the ever on going battle to capture more votes from extreme positions or 'bring the usa in line with international (read european) standards', in this case WIPO…

> How this Christmas gift was ever given to the RIAA is mind blowing.

$$$.

I think this is a part of a bigger issue. 1st amendment protects citizens from government censorship. DMCA creates a loophole where the govt isn't deciding what to censor, they are merely enforcing compliance of what a corporation wants to censor, sidestepping any 1A defense.

This means ultimately either platforms arbitrate, or the receiving party has to sue, either way it's chilling.

Re: YouTube-dl is now part of GitHub/dmca.git

#239

Post by lights0123 »

anta40 wrote: post #236

I still don't get this, though. Why DMCA-ed the entire project? Isn't simply removing the offending parts on code sufficient?

The claim was that the program as a whole was in violation, as it could be used to "circumvent the technological protection measures" such as those used in YouTube. They're also claiming that for the other sites it can download from.

Re: YouTube-dl is now part of GitHub/dmca.git

#240

Post by nhooyr »

corobo wrote: post #198

The internet is all fluffed up about the RIAA, people are calling things cancer, and calling things "retarded" in public comments. Don't forget the constant "well they should take down browsers, and Windows, and networking code!" retorts It's like we've gone back to the mid '00s. With that vibe, https://youtu.be/SnLB8wysMbY

Thank you for sharing that video, made my day haha
Post reply on HN