711–720 of 1001 posts
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…
An alternative: https://github.com/soimort/you-get
why would youtube-dl reference copyrighted material as examples in their documentation/website.... doh!
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Just to add a data point, but back when I still was working for a video distribution startup, we offered our customers the ability to directly import their video inventory from YouTube. They were the owners of the videos, it was just a convenient (and very popular!) feature for them to let us handle this import. We used YouTube-dl for this, of course. No way we could have done this easily without it. We imported hund…
Right, but that's not the heart of the matter. It's one thing if a tool designed for legitimate archiving use results in incidental violation of copyright. It's another thing entirely, legally, if a tool is designed for violating copyright. In such case, it doesn't matter if there are also legitimate fair use uses of the tool. And that's what the README showed: that youtube-dl was built primarily to violate copyright…
What are you basing your legal theory on?
Oh the irony of cloning a banned repo from a Chinese git mirror... c:\Users\david\dev\git λ git clone https://gitee.com/mirrors/youtube-downloader.git Cloning into 'youtube-downloader'... remote: Enumerating objects: 98560, done. remote: Counting objects: 100% (98560/98560), done. remote: Compressing objects: 100% (30542/30542), done. remote: Total 98560 (delta 73037), reused 90045 (delta 66441), pack-reused 0 Receiv…
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…
We might as well ban screen shots because it can illegally reproduce photography stills. /s
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…
"Napster could have been used for legal means as well, and it got destroyed in court." But Napster was a service run by an organization. youtube-dl is neither a service nor an organization. It's just some source code floating around the internet, to which volunteers contribute to. A very different situation. If anything, it's Youtube itself that's like Napster, and it's telling that the RIAA has gone after youtube-dl…
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Should it stand up to legal scrutiny though? What does it matter if I play the beatles on youtube by watching in a web browser or watching an .mp4 file that I just downloaded? It's functionally the same.
It stands up to legal scrutiny, and Betamax case is not applicable. They have these things called "streaming licenses" these days, that are very different from "download licenses" because streamed data is not the same thing as a downloaded file even if they both use the same codec and are derived from the same source.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
ok so I might just be stupid but how does that link let me clone the repo?.....
https://web.archive.org/web/20201018130325/https://codeload.... is a link to zip of master from commit 4eda10499e8db831167062b0e0dbc7d10d34c1f9, which was around 18/10/2020
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…
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…
It’s the same issue with deplatforming people, do we want a world where literally you lose the ability to share knowledge others don’t agree with Or in this case, a tool that could be used maliciously