Live data from Hacker News

YouTube-dl has received a DMCA takedown from RIAA

github.com

21–30 of 1001 posts

Re: YouTube-dl has received a DMCA takedown from RIAA

#21
Curious if anyone with legal expertise knows if this has legs? They say:

> The clear purpose of this source code is to (i) circumvent the technological protection measures used by authorized streaming services such as YouTube, and (ii) reproduce and distribute music videos and sound recordings owned by our member companies without authorization for such use.

But the "circumventing" is still accessing a stream the user can view anyways, and the "reproduce and distribute" feels like a stretch -- there's no inherent distribution. This isn't anything like a pirating or a torrenting tool.

It feels more akin to when movie studios sued VCR manufacturers for being able to record TV back in 1984 -- and lost [1].

(Also, side note but I have never in my life seen a story upvoted so quickly on HN. 130 points in just 7 minutes so far.)

[1] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sony_Corp._of_America_v._Unive....

Re: YouTube-dl has received a DMCA takedown from RIAA

#22
post #4

Note that RIAA is making this takedown because the software CAN be used to download copyrighted music and videos, and it uses examples in the ~~README~~(unit tests, see correction[1]) as an example of that: > We also note that the source code prominently includes as sample uses of the source code the downloading of copies of our members’ copyrighted sound recordings and music videos, as noted in Exhibit A hereto. For…

[deleted]

Re: YouTube-dl has received a DMCA takedown from RIAA

#26
post #2

FWIW, I'm forking youtube-dl right now.

Just so you know, they expressly mention that’s not a good idea in the notice. Also, I'm just the messenger so please don't shoot/downvote me

And I hereby expressly mention that it is, so there you have it.

Re: YouTube-dl has received a DMCA takedown from RIAA

#27

How can a program be in violation of DMCA? Is a knife in violation of the criminal justice system because some people use it to kill and therefore no one can use it anywhere, ever? How ridiculous.

> Is a knife in violation of the criminal justice system because some people use it to kill and therefore no one can use it anywhere, ever?

I mean, guns are banned in many countries using precisely the same reasoning. And I might totally be wrong about this but I heard that in the UK you need to be over 18 to buy even just kitchen knives.

Re: YouTube-dl has received a DMCA takedown from RIAA

#28

I’ll admit that I’m ignorant of US law specifics here, and I’m not sure about YouTube’s DRM and/or policy regarding downloading videos is. So I’ll ask: is this DMCA request justified? Why would the RIAA be going after YouTube-dl, rather than Google? Wouldn’t it make more sense for the RIAA to go after YouTube instead?

I wonder why they don't go after Chrome and Firefox as well.

Re: YouTube-dl has received a DMCA takedown from RIAA

#29
post #5

https://github.com/ytdl-org/youtube-dl > Repository unavailable due to DMCA takedown. (a) Are there mirrors? (b) Are there Github equivalents in e.g. Russia where the RIAA doesn't have jurisdiction or extradition power?

In Russia they've banned whole github multiple times and have their own "RIAA" that helped to create the firewall.

Re: YouTube-dl has received a DMCA takedown from RIAA

#30

I’ll admit that I’m ignorant of US law specifics here, and I’m not sure about YouTube’s DRM and/or policy regarding downloading videos is. So I’ll ask: is this DMCA request justified? Why would the RIAA be going after YouTube-dl, rather than Google? Wouldn’t it make more sense for the RIAA to go after YouTube instead?

The RIAA's logic is that a youtube-dl user is equivalent to someone in a movie theater with a video camera. The situation they're concerned about is somebody downloading a music video that they've authorized to be on Youtube. They make money on Youtube views, but they're losing precious fractions of a cent when you download it and watch it offline.

This is obviously not ethically justified, but I have no idea if it's legally justified.

Post reply on HN