Live data from Hacker News

GitHub Warns Users Reposting YouTube-DL They Could Be Banned

torrentfreak.com

231–240 of 273 posts

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

#231

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Technically the DMCA does not match the format and/or include all required information. From what I've understood a DMCA MUST include a list of the works being violated. The RIAA also failed to conform to GitHub's standard format, although using a standard form if available is perhaps something you SHOULD rather than MUST do..

From a substantive perspective, you're thinking of a different area of the DMCA, for noticed related to copyrighted works. The RIAA notice at issue here was based on 1201, for tools used to circumvent copyright, and so it's not necessary to disclose the works being violated. From a formatting perspective, format is generally irrelevant to notices like this because the law does not state a particular format must be us…

Just because it's part of the DMCA doesn't mean it is allowed to be used in a take-down notice. Or at the very least such a notice wouldn't have to be construed as such. At least that's what I understood from this article: https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=24888234

And while formatting is somewhat irrelevant from a legal standpoint it is still one of the tools Github uses to ensure that their take-down requests contain all the required information. Acting upon a request that doesn't conform to the format is risky.

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

#232

Earlier quoted context omitted.

If I can access the video without even logging into YouTube, then I'm pretty sure that doesn't count as Digital Rights Management ?

I can watch a BluRay without an account; just throw it into the player. Doesn’t mean it doesn’t have DRM.

You have to buy it first.

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

#233
post #201
post #180

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> Git is not truly decentralized, in the sense that you still need to provide a few specific remote hosts, all of which could disappear due to law enforcement. Some time ago, I and a friend worked together on a project in a place where there was no centralized git server; both of us ran git-daemon ( https://git-scm.com/docs/git-daemon ) on our desktops, and we often pulled from the other as we developed each feature.…

> each developer has a full copy of the code and its history But this doesn't solve the problem of how arbitrary public should locate and access those copies. If the code isn't accessible by its intended users, it effectively doesn't exist.

Neither does BitTorrent handle the distribution of .torrent files or magnet links itself.

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

#234

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> >"Time for a decentralized version control system?" I have to laugh at this one. Git is a decentralized VCS, that was effectively re-centralized (via Github) for the sake of convenience.

This is a horrible misunderstanding of decentralisation in the context of git. Git was designed to be distributed in the sense that people work on a local copies of their code which they then reintroduce into the project. Projects themselves are not supposed to be decentralised, there is supposed to be a single point of truth which represents the collaborative effort of everyone working on it. And that's what needs t…

There is no top, except by convention. Your copy of the code is as much the "real" one as anyone else's.

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

#235

When men were men, every single GH user would host YT-dl in protest, then good luck to MS alienating their entire userbase. (ps. I don't have a GH account)

Here, create an account and for this: https://github.com/l1ving/youtube-dl

Err: fork....

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

#236
post #227

Earlier quoted context omitted.

No, the RIAA notice is on pretty solid ground in the U.S. You'll note that organizations like the EFF haven't weighed in on this like they normally do when content owners get overzealous with enforcing IP controls, nor have many of the usual IP law commentators. And more importantly, the youtube-dl creators would have already filed a response if the RIAA notice was as week as so many people in this thread have claime…

Are you a lawyer? Or do you work for the RIAA? > youtube-dl creators would have already filed a response if the RIAA notice was as week There was actually a claim filed by a US company affiliated with youtube-dl. See https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=RCrJM-MrKyI .

That isn't a counter claim, it is a lawsuit by a company that isn't affiliated with youtube-dl and the claims of the suit predate the youtube-dl incident.

In 2019, the RIAA got a court order to have Google remove the Yout domains from search results. Yout is arguing that their service provides time shifting, which is fair use, and their domains should be restored on Google search. Plus, they want damages.

FYI -- Yout has been blocked from several ISPs in Europe because courts have found their service to be illegal stream ripping and infringes copyright.

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

#237

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?

I use it to watch YouTube videos in MPV. I have a machine where Chrome won't start and Firefox can't reliably display video without dropped frames, but MPV runs perfectly.

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

#238
post #236
post #227

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Are you a lawyer? Or do you work for the RIAA? > youtube-dl creators would have already filed a response if the RIAA notice was as week There was actually a claim filed by a US company affiliated with youtube-dl. See https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=RCrJM-MrKyI .

That isn't a counter claim, it is a lawsuit by a company that isn't affiliated with youtube-dl and the claims of the suit predate the youtube-dl incident. In 2019, the RIAA got a court order to have Google remove the Yout domains from search results. Yout is arguing that their service provides time shifting, which is fair use, and their domains should be restored on Google search. Plus, they want damages. FYI -- Yout…

I watched the talk some days ago. You apparently came to another conlusion. Do you have references about the case you mentioned?

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

#239

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Well, I would strongly suggest you speak to a lawyer on it, but I would note this strategy only really gives you an American judgement, and the RIAA takedown would still apply in any other territory. I don't know if Github would host content where they felt there were issues in some countries and not others. Would they geofilter it as they do with Iranian contributors due to US sanctions?

Why would the RIAA takedown apply in other jurisdictions, when it cites US law?

> Why would the RIAA takedown apply in other jurisdictions, when it cites US law?

The RIAA can probably afford to send a second letter citing British or German law.

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

#240
post #171

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The US and some of its allies have signed treaties and agreements that protect IP internationally.

None of those matter if a US court has declared that there's no infringement. Also, many of those probably don't cover circumvention.

Literally everyone who is a member of WIPO covers circumvention, so that's 193 countries.
Post reply on HN