I'm Not Invidious

While I'm sympathetic to people running alternative frontends and I use another such project (nitter) myself, nitpicking on the language is unlikely to help the author of this blog post, and I think they'd be better off consulting a lawyer on this one.

On Github[1] and invidious.io[2] they say they're the project manager and manage finances, which puts them in a leadership role, and therefore capable of directing the project, including cessation of its operation. Imagine if a CEO started nitpicking about how it's "not their product or service" and it was the company maintaining it, and how they weren't a low level employee and thus not responsible for the activities of the company.

And even if we are to assume that "project manager" is simply an honorary position, there is a level of implied responsibility even in these positions. As an example, CEO positions often inch closer to being honorary, as demonstrated by some CEOs being on the boards of multiple companies.

It is a different question as to whether the cessation of its operation is an effective measure or not, or whether running alternative frontends should be a violation of a law. Imagine a situation where Alice and their friends bully Bob. Bob gets a restraining order against Alice, and Alice argues that their friends like to bully Bob as well, so a restraining order against Alice won't help. "Other people can also do it" isn't a valid legal defense, even when it is true.

It's also interesting that they didn't release the full letter sent by Google. I wonder if it's actually a C&D but the author simply hopes that they can avoid complying with it only because it uses "To Whom It May Concern", which is standard legal verbiage.

[1] https://github.com/TheFrenchGhosty

[2] https://invidious.io/team/

Re: I'm Not Invidious

#5

Post by pcthrowaway » Sat, Jun 10, 2023, 4:32 AM UTC

It's not clear to me why they would stop contributing to an open source video player, just because Google wants them to.

That aside, I imagine invidious (app) servers which allow users to watch content from Google's servers may be candidates for shutdown.

For example, here's a random video from the front page of an invidous server about the reddit blackout (I haven't watched it): https://yewtu.be/watch?v=fBruoybHryU

But the video itself is coming from https://rr1---sn-ux3n588t-t8ge.googlevideo.com/

I assume this would be nominally legal under the same reasoning that hotlinking images is legal. If hotlinking images is found to be illegal though (which I think Google is powerful enough to force), then I think Google is going to have to do some reorganizing of their index (see case where someone sued Google, and lost, because Google was prominently displaying a website that hotlinked their image: https://www.theregister.com/2020/01/16/google_search_image_r...)

So it's an interesting one to watch for precedent, but I don't think Google is going to want to force courts to agree that hotlinking another website is infringement, because they'd potentially have to deindex 90% of the internet.

On the other hand, their search result quality has reduced so drastically of late, maybe they don't care about this.

Re: I'm Not Invidious

#6

Post by metadat » Sat, Jun 10, 2023, 4:39 AM UTC

supriyo-biswas wrote: post #4

While I'm sympathetic to people running alternative frontends and I use another such project (nitter) myself, nitpicking on the language is unlikely to help the author of this blog post, and I think they'd be better off consulting a lawyer on this one. On Github[1] and invidious.io[2] they say they're the project manager and manage finances, which puts them in a leadership role, and therefore capable of directing the…

+1, Yes.

Though I'm reluctant to add any fuel to this tire dumpster fire bum fight. This reeks of an odd sort of reverse troll play.

Why didn't the letter get a prompt introduction to the shredder? No HN post or other public discourse required. My mother does this to bogus mail literally all the time.

Nobody of consequence cares what this person or their strange little business is doing. Pay your taxes, beyond that, shine on and have a glorious life.

Re: I'm Not Invidious

#7

Post by devsda » Sat, Jun 10, 2023, 5:00 AM UTC

> Invidious isn’t my project, I don’t own the “Invidious” trademark, I’m not Invidious, I don’t represent Invidious. I’m just… me. > Invidious is.

The post comes off as a little idealistic and dismissive. I hope they have given enough thought and have sufficient countermeasures in place for the project if the law disagree with their view.

Re: I'm Not Invidious

#8

Post by PCP7 » Sat, Jun 10, 2023, 5:07 AM UTC

pcthrowaway wrote: post #5

It's not clear to me why they would stop contributing to an open source video player, just because Google wants them to. That aside, I imagine invidious (app) servers which allow users to watch content from Google's servers may be candidates for shutdown. For example, here's a random video from the front page of an invidous server about the reddit blackout (I haven't watched it): https://yewtu.be/watch?v=fBruoybHryU…

Images don't sell ads.

Re: I'm Not Invidious

#9

Post by anothernewdude » Sat, Jun 10, 2023, 5:16 AM UTC

What a stupid request. An alternate front-end is essentially a custom browser.

Re: I'm Not Invidious

#10

Post by gardnr » Sat, Jun 10, 2023, 5:20 AM UTC

klysm wrote: post #2

Curious how the US legal system will feel about that

I wonder if they will extradite the author, who lives in France, to answer for these crimes in the US.