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

YouTube-Dl Site Goes Offline as Hosting Provider Enforces Court-Ordered Ban

torrentfreak.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

171–180 of 256 posts

Re: YouTube-Dl Site Goes Offline as Hosting Provider Enforces Court-Ordered Ban

#171

Post by Mordisquitos »

pwdisswordfishc wrote: post #167
pessimizer wrote: post #87

Earlier quoted context omitted.

In order to watch these videos, your computer downloads the videos. Your radio doesn't have to download a copy of the song to play it. > I can't imaging there being a large percentage of "legitmate" and fair usage. My usage is usually no less legitimate than youtube's usage. I'm usually downloading things that were uploaded without permission from the copyright holders from a platform that is distributing them withou…

> Your radio doesn't have to download a copy of the song to play it. Yes, it does. It’s called ‘receiving the signal’.

All a conventional radio does is translate electromagnetic waves that are already surrounding it into sound waves that we can hear. An intellectual-property-maximalist lawyer could cogently argue that a radio that records the signal onto a tape or other storage device is somehow violating the IP rights of the authors, as it is interacting with the work in materially different way than an ordinary radio. Not that I would agree with this lawyer in any way, but the lawyer would at least have a basis to argue that one thing is not like the other.

However, video streams are not a signal floating in the EM spectrum. They are 1:1 connections that must be requested, their content must be actively downloaded onto local memory, and the content must be transcoded and/or decoded into images and sound to be consumed by a human. The point is that this description is as true for a video being watched on the official YouTube app on a Pixel 5 as it is for a video that has been downloaded with youtube-dl/yt-dl on a PC. There is no material difference in the actual events taking place.

Re: YouTube-Dl Site Goes Offline as Hosting Provider Enforces Court-Ordered Ban

#172

Post by KolmogorovComp »

> A German court previously ruled that stream-ripping software bypasses YouTube’s ‘rolling cipher’ download protection. This is seen as a circumvention of technical protection measures, a violation of intellectual property law in Europe.`

Does someone know what they mean by 'rolling cipher' here?

Re: YouTube-Dl Site Goes Offline as Hosting Provider Enforces Court-Ordered Ban

#173

Post by 1vuio0pswjnm7 »

skyyler wrote: post #3

As noted in the article, the project still has a page on github: http://ytdl-org.github.io/youtube-dl/ I've moved on to https://github.com/yt-dlp/yt-dlp anyways. But this is still an infuriating move. youtube-dl wasn't doing anything infringing on its site, was it?

Currently, AFAICT, the "rolling cipher" is not even required for unthrottled speed. I could be wrong. I am not an expert on YT. However I tested all the 30+ sample videos in youtube.py^1 outside the browser, without using "youtube-dl" or "youtube-dlp", and got only unthrottled speeds. Perhaps someone can provide an example to prove that this "rolling cipher" is actually required.

1. https://raw.githubusercontent.com/yt-dlp/yt-dlp/master/yt_dl...

Another point I never see discussed is that every YT video page contains download links in the source of the page. No "rolling cipher" is needed to use them. I think it's fair to call them "download" links because the speed is throttled to be too slow for "streaming".

Re: YouTube-Dl Site Goes Offline as Hosting Provider Enforces Court-Ordered Ban

#174

Post by PartiallyTyped »

agensaequivocum wrote: post #162
PartiallyTyped wrote: post #120

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I don’t know how any sane person thinks a bunch of larpers - even if they themselves don’t see them as such - can defend themselves against a willing US military…

A few points: * How effective one may be in defending himself does not change the right in anyway. * This is why the right extends to all arms of modern warfare. E.g., machine-guns, mortars, grenades, tanks, night vision, etc. * The Founder were very much against a standing army...we should probably abolish it. * When combatants are mixed with non-combatants, one cannot just drop a bomb. Because of this, well armed i…

You can’t own guns banned by your state. Afaik you can’t own a rocket launcher, missiles, AAs, AT mines, nukes etc.

Re 4: a willing army can very much do whatever it wants. There are no laws of physics that prevent whatever happened in Bakhmut from happening.

Re: YouTube-Dl Site Goes Offline as Hosting Provider Enforces Court-Ordered Ban

#175

Post by kzrdude »

sgjohnson wrote: post #31
d0mine wrote: post #15

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Microsoft is the freedom fighter? That it is indeed laughable.

Microsoft has largely stopped giving a fuck about piracy of their consumer products. py-kms is freely available on GitHub, and so are Windows Activation Tools. While arguably py-kms doesn’t violate anything, as it’s a cleanroom implementation of the KMS server, Windows Activation Tools definitely does. Either way, MS could eradicate all of those repositories, they aren’t doing it.

Youtube didn't care about piracy and copyright at all either. In their audience growth phase.

Re: YouTube-Dl Site Goes Offline as Hosting Provider Enforces Court-Ordered Ban

#176

Post by [deleted] »

pengaru wrote: post #122

What I don't understand is why aren't these companies suing YouTube/Alphabet? They're the one's enabling the purported copyright violations. They're the ones profiting. They're the ones with the mountain of money attorneys are generally employed to take from. If anything these attorneys should be supporting youtube-dl/yt-dlp maintenance and using it in support of their claims. What could be more damming of YouTube's…

[deleted]

Re: YouTube-Dl Site Goes Offline as Hosting Provider Enforces Court-Ordered Ban

#177

Post by onetokeoverthe »

Workaccount2 wrote: post #67
A4ET8a8uTh0 wrote: post #55

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I agree and I don't. We can rip dvds almost precisely, because spreading stuff beyond the ability for it to be easily controlled under single point of failure.

Nothing could really be done about DVDs because the hardware was immutable and already out in the wild. Highlighting a still operating service though just draws legal attention to it. It's like finding a crappy bar everyone hates that stores beers out back in a alley. You can keep it to yourself and enjoy it for years, or you can "protest" the bar by telling the whole town about it. See ad-blocking for a real world e…

[dead]

Re: YouTube-Dl Site Goes Offline as Hosting Provider Enforces Court-Ordered Ban

#178

Post by IshKebab »

netsharc wrote: post #100
danuker wrote: post #92

Earlier quoted context omitted.

It's funny how a trillion-dollar company is playing cat-and-mouse with a few free software projects, and losing most of the time.

I have a feeling Google/Alphabet/YouTube aren't investing a lot of money into this, because they know their opponents have almost infinite resource, of free time and dedication. Besides how would you like to work in the YouTube "DRM" team, where every few weeks you'd show up to work and the news is "well, they cracked it again, your last few months' of work is useless.".

I don't think that's necessarily true. People said that about Blu-ray for ages, and for a while they were right but in the end the industry had people paid to keep updating keys and fixing bugs forever, and the open source world only has volunteers.

Last I checked (which was a very long time ago) the only way to rip a Blu-ray was through a commercial program.

That's probably partly because Blu-ray waned in popularity compared to streaming. Still I definitely think it's wrong to assume that Google couldn't win this battle.

Re: YouTube-Dl Site Goes Offline as Hosting Provider Enforces Court-Ordered Ban

#179

Post by somat »

charcircuit wrote: post #11
skyyler wrote: post #3

As noted in the article, the project still has a page on github: http://ytdl-org.github.io/youtube-dl/ I've moved on to https://github.com/yt-dlp/yt-dlp anyways. But this is still an infuriating move. youtube-dl wasn't doing anything infringing on its site, was it?

yt-dlp is not youtube-dl

The main difference in the fork is that yt-dlp uses the android interface and youtube-dl uses the web interface.

Re: YouTube-Dl Site Goes Offline as Hosting Provider Enforces Court-Ordered Ban

#180

Post by leshenka »

Espionage724 wrote: post #71

[flagged]

I used to live in a place with very crappy internet and watching youtube even in 360p was a no go. And youtube doesn't let you buffer entire video since 2012 I guess.

I figured if I feed whatever I want to watch to yt-dlp and give it some time I will be able to watch videos without buffering and in much better quality too

Post reply on HN