RIAA Takedowns Backfire as Pirated MP3s Now Surface on GitHub • Hacker News Board

Re: RIAA Takedowns Backfire as Pirated MP3s Now Surface on GitHub

#181

Post by dmix » Wed, Nov 04, 2020, 10:10 PM UTC

zimbatm wrote: post #138

skyde wrote: post #102

Earlier quoted context omitted.

the problem is lot of the incentive to contribute for free is the name recognition. Lot of dev see it as a way to show what they can do (portfolio) because that can’t share the code they produce at work

That's only true for high-profile projects. Projects like YouTube-dl are usually born out of passion, and the best kind of projects.

Yep, plenty of tools in the infosec world on github and elsewhere are published by anonymous developers.

Plus when you use an anonymous name and get a popular project out of it, you still get recognition. Even if it's not publicly in your name. You'll still feel good about contributing to the world.

Re: RIAA Takedowns Backfire as Pirated MP3s Now Surface on GitHub

#182

Post by Vorh » Wed, Nov 04, 2020, 10:13 PM UTC

sp332 wrote: post #169

IggleSniggle wrote: post #140

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Yuuup. I haven’t used youtube-dl since I was a teacher and needed it to bring educational videos into the classroom that lacked Internet. But now I have a copy of the source, and have been thinking about how I might contribute and/or repackage it as a “browser” (with the option to run it in “headless mode”, of course).

You have a snapshot of the source, which will be less useful over time as sites change their code and the plugins stop working.

...yes, that's how downloading works.

Re: RIAA Takedowns Backfire as Pirated MP3s Now Surface on GitHub

#183

Post by dotancohen » Wed, Nov 04, 2020, 10:41 PM UTC

dotancohen wrote: post #168

simias wrote: post #142

Earlier quoted context omitted.

You could, but that would get messy quick since it would add a new commits to be merged/rebased every time somebody wants to comment. I guess the easiest solution would be to make it a submodule so that it could evolve at its own pace, but then you still want to be able to reference specific versions of the code in the comments, so maybe it would make more sense to make the code a submodule of the issue repo. Maybe w…

> You could, but that would get messy quick since it would > add a new commits to be merged/rebased every time somebody > wants to comment. How about a branch "bugtracker". A smart UI could keep this branch checked out internally. You know what, I'm going to flesh this out. If anybody has something insightful, please comment here. I'll write the first rough UI in Python CLI app, but the real value I'm looking to crea…

Here is the repo, PRs welcome: https://github.com/dotancohen/entomology

Note that this is very rough, it only has about two hours of work in it.

Re: RIAA Takedowns Backfire as Pirated MP3s Now Surface on GitHub

#184

Post by johnny_b_g » Wed, Nov 04, 2020, 11:03 PM UTC

jhomedall wrote: post #176

sebastien_b wrote: post #173

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Show on the list where youtube-dl has been proven illegal. Implying criminality because you're participating on something "of dubious legality" defined nebulously ("guilt by association") wouldn't play well.

As per the post you are replying to, choice of programming project is, unlike race and religion, not a protected class. It is perfectly legal in the US for a company to discriminate based on it. A company could also freely and legally discriminate based on whether or not you prefer whole-wheat bread. That's not a protected class. It doesn't matter that whole-wheat bread is legal.

I think you guys are conflating this with what the poster is getting at, which based on what was said ("implying criminality"), is more akin to defamation (though admittedly the choice of earlier examples is poor).

If, as an employer, I decide that because you chose a specific project (or political party, or brand of motor bike, etc. anything whose association has potential 'dubious legal status') that you're part of a criminal organization (and hence a criminal, or any other description that might be undesirable/harmful) because of that and don't hire you, that may put me at risk.

Obviously there would be a legal bar to meet from that, not the least of which would be proving that it was intentional to defame the person, and resulted in actual damages to that person (i.e. proper standing - would not getting the job be enough?)

IDK IANAL, but I sure AF wouldn't want to be the trailblazer for finding out (like IBM is right now).

Re: RIAA Takedowns Backfire as Pirated MP3s Now Surface on GitHub

#185

Post by simonblack » Thu, Nov 05, 2020, 12:46 AM UTC

dotancohen wrote: post #44

simias wrote: post #31

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I don't think the studios care either, it's the artists that are at the forefront. As long as their image is not spoiled the rest doesn't really matter, I doubt many people buy (or don't buy) an album because it's published by Sony Music or Universal.

I know laymen that otherwise wouldn't care, but would not buy Sony Music. Sony ruined some hardware back in the day. I don't think that anyone I know personally had hardware ruined, but they heard of it and learned to stay clear of Sony Music.

Yep. Sony has been on my 'do not buy anything Sony" for almost 20 years now.

I used to buy lots of music and video. I deliberately stopped buying anything in that line way back in the early 2000s. Roughly at the same time as my Sony boycott.

Re: RIAA Takedowns Backfire as Pirated MP3s Now Surface on GitHub

#186

Post by brokenmachine » Thu, Nov 05, 2020, 3:26 AM UTC

YetAnotherNick wrote: post #117

ChrisMarshallNY wrote: post #78

I'm not sure I'd call this "backfiring," as I'm sure that the RIAA must have seen this coming (they have been the Snidely Whiplash of the tech industry for a couple of decades). This kind of reaction is not exactly anything new; just the medium. I think that pirating streams actually helps to sell music. At least, in my limited sample pool, that has been the case. I used to stream an Internet radio station that playe…

> I think that pirating streams actually helps to sell music. At least, in my limited sample pool, that has been the case. So you say that users pirate the music and then buy the same music they illegally downloaded?

>music they illegally downloaded

Since this site has a technical audience, please explain to me how streamed music is played at all, if it is not downloaded?

What I am getting at is - where is the line drawn? Supposedly I am fine to download when streaming but I am not allowed to retain that downloaded file. Once the stream is in my cache, I can rewind and play it a thousand times without downloading it again, but if I close my browser or power off the PC, suddenly I seem to be legally required to download it again - all of this on a PC that I have paid for, and on a network connection that I also pay for data on.

This all seems like a lot of control for a third party to demand over the internal workings of a PC and network connection that I pay the bills for.

Legally, would I be able to run a virtual machine with a browser inside, take a snapshot of the state just after caching a stream, and save that to return to later? Why or why not?

Re: RIAA Takedowns Backfire as Pirated MP3s Now Surface on GitHub

#187

Post by wernercd » Thu, Nov 05, 2020, 3:30 AM UTC

sebastien_b wrote: post #173

wernercd wrote: post #163

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Show where in the list of protected classes (race, sex, ethnicity, etc) "your choice of programming projects" is covered? Two of those are protected classes... the third one isn't.

Show on the list where youtube-dl has been proven illegal. Implying criminality because you're participating on something "of dubious legality" defined nebulously ("guilt by association") wouldn't play well.

I didn't imply YTDL was illegal. My response was directly to your implication that "committed code to a repo" (or however you want to phrase it) is a protected class like race or sex.

> "Oh, you committed code to a repo I consider dubious though nothing proven... hmmm not sure I'll hire you". > "Oh, you shop at a store run by a non-white person.... hmmm not sure I'll hire you". > "Oh, you follow a religion, but I'm atheist... hmmm not sure I'll hire you".

There are zero laws on the books to stop a company from firing you for committing code to an open source project.

Unless you can find me a law that actually says "Companies can't terminate employment or otherwise discriminate based on a code repo commit".

There ARE actual laws that say "You can't discriminate based on Race/Religion/Sex/ethnicity/etc".

Whether or not YTDL is illegal (I doubt it is) is irrelevant to this thread. Just like a company firing you because of a post on facebook or twitter is generally allowed (local laws and state statutes may grant more protections).

Please... prove me wrong and provide laws - local or otherwise - and possible a case where someone successfully sued for wrongful discrimination based on code they wrote.

Re: RIAA Takedowns Backfire as Pirated MP3s Now Surface on GitHub

#188

Post by polski-g » Thu, Nov 05, 2020, 4:39 AM UTC

heavyset_go wrote: post #172

skyyler wrote: post #109

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I hope something replaces reddit soon. The creeping features are beginning to rot.

Once Reddit finishes its transformation into an meme image and video board, the current incarnation of its platform will go the way of forums and newsgroups. Over time, Facebook groups and Twitter have become the de facto discussion hubs for communities that I've been a part of for years. Those platforms make it hard to not reveal your true identity online, and you have to give Facebook and Twitter your phone number…

Reddit threading is just garbage. Impossible to follow the conversation beyond the comment you directly responded to and the immediate ones thereafter. Anything deeper and you never get a notification.

Re: RIAA Takedowns Backfire as Pirated MP3s Now Surface on GitHub

#189

Post by na85 » Thu, Nov 05, 2020, 4:56 AM UTC

na85 wrote: post #74

beloch wrote: post #72

Music consumers across multiple generations, while supporting artists, have expected a certain degree of freedom with the music playback technology placed in their hands. Whether it was recording a custom mix-tape for a special friend full of copied tracks or ripping a stream to play back on demand, there are certain things that most people see as reasonable and harmless. RIAA made a habit of attacking things seen as…

>Musicians deserve better. Some do. I seem to recall Nirvana being outspoken of their corporate attack dogs the RIAA back in the Napster days when the RIAA was with a straight face claiming damages that totaled more money than was in circulation, globally.

My bad, mixed up Metallica and Nirvana in my head. I don't listen to metal, obviously. Can't edit.

Re: RIAA Takedowns Backfire as Pirated MP3s Now Surface on GitHub

#190

Post by Qwertious » Thu, Nov 05, 2020, 5:39 AM UTC

MaxBarraclough wrote: post #75

simias wrote: post #63

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The problem is that git is not feature complete to replace github. In hindsight I wish it had gone the Fossil route: integrate issue management in the distributed repo. If issues, wiki and code review were integrated in git proper it would be trivial to change host on a dime. Unfortunately it doesn't work that way (yet?).

> If issues, wiki and code review were integrated in git proper it would be trivial to change host on a dime. It would also constrain the various competing solutions to all conform to the git standard.

"It would also constrain the various competing solutions to all conform to the git standard. "

That's already more-or-less the case. Gitlab refuses to add Hg support because they pretty much hardcoded their platform around Git and don't want to abstract that away. Github doesn't support Hg. And in August, Bitbucket permanently disabled their Hg support too.

Personally, I want to see Git die. But you're talking about pantomime portability here.