611–620 of 1001 posts
The more often this happens, the more we'll learn about reproducible builds, decentralized (and/or anonymous) code hosting, and setup tools and software that uses this more. I'm sure the distributed tar.gz is next on the list for this DMCA and we can't rely on things hosted on the clear web anymore.
[1]: https://radicle.xyz/
* Downloading a video you uploaded and no longer have stored locally.
* Downloading a video to create a fair-use response video.
* Downloading video/music that is free commons (or some other non-restrictive license).
* (Gray) Downloading content to archive it.
* Downloading content you have already purchased and have in your possession.
* (Dark gray) Downloading content you have a paid subscription to view, but don't have reliable internet.
All of these anti-piracy measures need to answer one simple question - what stops somebody from just screen recording your material? At the point in which somebody can view your material on another device, you've lost a lot of control.
P.S. This clone seems legit:
`git clone https://gitea.eponym.info/Mirrors/youtube-dl.git`
Earlier quoted context omitted.
What if collaboration on opensource projects (i.e. hosting, issues and their comments) was decentralized instead of relying on a central entity like Github? That would keep the developer base active and make DMCA takedowns ineffective.
Since git is already decentralized, this definitely seems doable.
Mainly what they need besides that is a place to co-ordinate, collaborate and track tickets. Solutions abound.
The RIAA's actions are annoying but won't kill the project.
The removal of youtube-dl is a loss to the open source community. I hope this does not set a precedence going forward and that authors re-establish themselves (and the bug tracker, which had immense amount of information). At the same time, this lead me to browse the Github's DMCA repo, which has some real gems. For example, this DMCA takedown of repo with copied course assignment of a different student and did not c…
Psst, precedent* :) Precedence is the order of importance in which something occurs (e.g. operator precedence). Precedent is a level of standard to which a secondary action is compared.
---
Also that dude's a fucking legend, DMCA takedown-ing his classmate.
Seems like a fresh mirror here https://gitea.eponym.info/Mirrors/youtube-dl to fork and start it over somewhere else. Gitea is a great project. Now we need someone to fork and publish it over Tor or something. Decentralized solution would be a next step. Diff between that mirror and the one from the web.archive.com looks good. I.e. no hidden/evil things inside. Looks safe to start over. ``` $ git log --oneline -3 48c…
Worth noting the MPA already tried doing this to Popcorn Time, a BitTorrent client designed to provide a Netflix-like UX.[1] The Popcorn Time devs put in a counter-notice and the repository was back up a few weeks later when the period for the MPA to respond expired. The same thing will probably happen here because this is not one of the purposes of DMCA takedown letters, period. Even if there are inappropriate test…
I just used windows-g to record upside down music video. Seems to work fine. mp4 file is in my captures video. Sound is great. How is that acceptable and this isn't? btw, Popcorn time is a bit different situation. I would say bit torrent is more the problem, or at least the people who upload pirated content. What is odd though is that it's the RIAA filing suit here and not google. Google has a real complaint, RIAA ce…
I guess I’m nitpicking but it’s important that they’re not “filing suit”, possibly because they don’t care enough or don’t think they have a case. DMCA takedown is a sort of dispute resolution process mandated by law, it’s not a substitute for an actual lawsuit.
I'm very scared by this. youtube-dl needs somewhat frequent updates as Google moves the youtube codebase around. I'm worried that the RIAA's next move, now that it's starting to get inconvenient to get youtube-dl, will be to make Youtube change in some way to make existing copies of youtube-dl no longer work. youtube-dl has been my primary way of getting videos since I learned about it. If the RIAA manages to kill it…
I think you have it backwards. Google is very much on the same side as RIAA in this case. Youtube-dl is simply too convenient for avoiding the ads.
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…
The fact that copyrighted works were included in the readme shows it was intended for that use, and the RIAA complaint will likely stand up to any legal scrutiny. Just because it can be used for legit purposes too won't matter in the slightest. I mean, Napster could have been used for legal means as well, and it got destroyed in court. The only chance tools like this have legally is when infringement is an "unintende…
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Can't it be trivially reinstated then by removing any references to copyrighted content? youtube-dl has plenty of legitimate uses beyond just copyright infringement.
The issue with the readme infects the rest of the code, even if it's removed. It's still evidence that the repository was intended to facilitate copyright infringement. The problem isn't the words of the readme but what those words imply about what the authors of the code intended. If they instead had released it and then said in a public forum "check out my cool code for copyright infringement" (but had a totally bl…
Earlier quoted context omitted.
The fact that copyrighted works were included in the readme shows it was intended for that use, and the RIAA complaint will likely stand up to any legal scrutiny. Just because it can be used for legit purposes too won't matter in the slightest. I mean, Napster could have been used for legal means as well, and it got destroyed in court. The only chance tools like this have legally is when infringement is an "unintende…
Curiously, what do scrapers (aka "readers") have to worry about with this topic? Eg, i'm making an archiver and reader combination that, for personal use, archives stuff in a Git-like store. Yet, Git (and Git-likes) can also be used to distribute.. so hypothetically i could use this software to scrape and distribute content. My intention is primarily to make news articles/etc searchable, archived, etc. Yet i'm sure N…
I'm not sure what that means for youtube-dl though.