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

GitHub Warns Users Reposting YouTube-DL They Could Be Banned

torrentfreak.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

191–200 of 273 posts

Re: GitHub Warns Users Reposting YouTube-DL They Could Be Banned

#191

Post by BlueTemplar »

nbzso wrote: post #81

Is it not the right time to decentralise those type of services? I think it is. Isn't this site owned by Microsoft? So if it is, this is normal big corporation behaviour. They embrace open-source community to gain advantage. Is there a way to host code without being dependent on big corporation? I am really interested in the answer of this question. Public programming code must be treated like public utility. For exa…

Also YouTube. It's harder, but software like PeerTube works surprisingly well !

Re: GitHub Warns Users Reposting YouTube-DL They Could Be Banned

#192

Post by gamblor956 »

Rochus wrote: post #131
eznzt wrote: post #86

Earlier quoted context omitted.

YouTube uses encrypted signatures as a way of hiding the URL of the video. https://github.com/l1ving/youtube-dl/blob/master/youtube_dl/...

It's like closing the door and hanging the key next to the door for all to see. Definitely not an effective technical measure to protect the house. EDIT: And not to forget that Youtube hosts many CC-BY licensed videos which explicitly allow unlimited use (incl. decryption if necessary), and that Youtube has contracts with copyright collectives in most countries so for any user it is save to assume that the video is l…

The DMCA does not require the technical measure to be highly effective, or even that it be effective at all.

It simply requires that a technical measure of some sort exists.

Thus, it doesn't matter that it's hanging the key next to the door; it is sufficient for the purposes of the DMCA that there is a closed door.

Re: GitHub Warns Users Reposting YouTube-DL They Could Be Banned

#193

Post by BlueTemplar »

optimuspaul wrote: post #120

am I the only one that doesn't support YouTube-dl? Are there use cases for it that are not downloading content that is not your own?

In the case that you were more concerned about the legality than the morality of it, you have to remember that downloading freely available videos on YouTube is perfectly legal. (Of course sharing the downloaded files is not, unless you have a copyright on them, or if they are in the public domain)

Re: GitHub Warns Users Reposting YouTube-DL They Could Be Banned

#194

Post by parliament32 »

jbotz wrote: post #20
26702670 wrote: post #14

Earlier quoted context omitted.

How is git centralised? Just self-host with Gitlab, Gitea, et cetera.

Those are still centralized, i.e. there is one host that belongs to some person or org that's the main upstream repo and which can be hit with a takedown reqeuest. Git itself can be used in a truly decentralized way by having the main repo on IPFS or the like, though. Edit: Also your sibling posts have pointers to projects with real decentralization, such as ForgeFed.

Git has no idea about a "the main upstream repo", that's a Github-et-al invention. Git will happily push/pull to a bunch of other peoples' repos with no "main" or central part at all.

If you've grown up in the Github era you've probably never seen multiple remotes, but here you go: https://git-scm.com/book/en/v2/Git-Basics-Working-with-Remot...

Re: GitHub Warns Users Reposting YouTube-DL They Could Be Banned

#195

Post by parliament32 »

jasode wrote: post #37

Some example comments in this thread: >"People should move their youbube-dl repositories to servers hosted in Switzerland, " >"Time for a decentralized version control system?" >"The nice thing about fossil" ... those well-meaning suggestions are missing the true difficulty : The community wants a (1) Schelling Point [0] for workflow/issues/discussions/PRs that's also (2) censorship resistant. So far, (1) and (2) con…

Git will happily push/pull to/from repos on your peers' computers, and you could just, you know, email a list of people instead of depending on a central mailing list for discussion. It'll suck to onboard new people but it's entirely possible to have a Git project + discussion without a single central point of failure.

Re: GitHub Warns Users Reposting YouTube-DL They Could Be Banned

#196

Post by gamblor956 »

Rochus wrote: post #169
Mindwipe wrote: post #152

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Indeed, what is an effective technical protection measure is highly debatable. The only problem is the only likely chance of definitively finding out in your territory is to have a criminal action against you and see if you win in court.

> the only likely chance of definitively finding out in your territory is to have a criminal action against you and see if you win in court The plaintiffs would have to prove that the videos that can be downloaded with youtube-dl are protected by an objectively effective technical measure and that the tool circumvents this protection, that the accused was aware of the effectiveness of the measure and the illegality o…

In Switzerland.

youtube-dl was, and still is, hosted in the U.S. And the DMCA is not as lenient as the laws of Switzerland.

And on that note, neither are the IP treaties that most Western countries have made with each other, Switzerland included.

Re: GitHub Warns Users Reposting YouTube-DL They Could Be Banned

#197

Post by m463 »

ikeboy wrote: post #44

Great. I posted two forks, if GitHub takes action then I've got standing to sue RIAA (under the declaratory judgement act), which I'd love to do pro se. Btw, if anyone is associated with any fork that did go down and is interested in bringing a pro se case, feel free to contact me. I'm not a lawyer and can't give legal advice but I can help point you at some helpful laws and cases. I've been fighting false infringeme…

I believe the RIAA has pretty good cause for the original takedown notice.

However, if you posted a fork which functioned like youtube-dl without mentioning an riaa protected copyrighted work that might be more meaningful.

Instead show how you could download your own video, or a video under CC0 or similar.

Re: GitHub Warns Users Reposting YouTube-DL They Could Be Banned

#198

Post by ikeboy »

gamblor956 wrote: post #182
ikeboy wrote: post #99

Earlier quoted context omitted.

RIAA made a claim that some content violates their rights under DMCA, which in this hypothetical causes my account to be blocked. I can bring a case under the declaratory judgement act against RIAA, asking a court to decide whether the content is actually infringing. See https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Declaratory_judgment I may also have a tortious interference claim, although damages are likely negligible so it's pro…

You really should talk to a lawyer because it sounds like the entire basis for your protest is grounded in a misunderstanding of how the DMCA provisions work. I can tell you based on what you've posted in this thread that you absolutely do not have a tortious interference claim unless you've entered into contracts you haven't previously mentioned.

I've talked to plenty of lawyers and spent plenty of money on intellectual property issues. I know what I'm talking about. A declaratory judgement suit is in my view the proper avenue to address a tenuous IP claim.

Like I said, tortious interference is not a great fit, but it's still applicable - interference with my contract with Github counts as interference. If it was an actual DMCA notice then the only remedy would be a 512(f) suit (plus declaratory judgement) because DMCA preempts other causes of action (caveat: [0]), but it's not a DMCA notice.

https://www.courtlistener.com/docket/8166790/tech-and-goods-... here's a recent decision where a tortious interference claim was upheld when a false infringement claim was made to a third party (Amazon in this case). See dkt 30.

https://mdcourts.gov/sites/default/files/unreported-opinions... here's a tortious interference case that went to a jury and 150k in punitive damages was awarded despite actual damages only being around 5k (reduced by appeals to 75k+interest.)

[0] Note that some jurisdictions haven't explicitly held that DMCA preempts state claims such as tortious interference, and at least one IP lawyer I've spoken to has brought state claims in such a jurisdiction.

Re: GitHub Warns Users Reposting YouTube-DL They Could Be Banned

#200

Post by ikeboy »

m463 wrote: post #197
ikeboy wrote: post #44

Great. I posted two forks, if GitHub takes action then I've got standing to sue RIAA (under the declaratory judgement act), which I'd love to do pro se. Btw, if anyone is associated with any fork that did go down and is interested in bringing a pro se case, feel free to contact me. I'm not a lawyer and can't give legal advice but I can help point you at some helpful laws and cases. I've been fighting false infringeme…

I believe the RIAA has pretty good cause for the original takedown notice. However, if you posted a fork which functioned like youtube-dl without mentioning an riaa protected copyrighted work that might be more meaningful. Instead show how you could download your own video, or a video under CC0 or similar.

They might have good cause, but that doesn't mean they'll win in court.

As I said in many of the threads on this topic, I think the RIAA's letter is in good faith, and it's not plausible to get damages from them, but they could still lose on the underlying issue in court.

Post reply on HN