MX Linux Forum

Posted: **Fri Oct 23, 2020 9:20 pm**

The youtube-dl GitHub repo has received a DMCA takedown request from the RIAA

https://www.reddit.com/r/Python/comment ... ed_a_dmca/

Posted: **Fri Oct 23, 2020 9:27 pm**

Strong argument in favor of moving code off of GitHub.

Posted: **Sat Oct 24, 2020 7:54 am**

Where there is a will...

https://gitlab.com/MariaTelos/youtube-d ... /README.md

Posted: **Sat Oct 24, 2020 10:26 am**

All it takes is an riaa dmca notice to gitlab...

Posted: **Sat Oct 24, 2020 10:30 am**

So RIAA issues takedown because it might be used to download copyright material. Guess it 's too hard for them to chase down the millions of illegal copyright-infringing Youtube posts. Shame the same argument doesn't get applied to guns because they might be used to kill people.
I've mostly used youtube-dl to download material which is not available anywhere else. Glad it's still available on Gitlab and PyPI.

dolphin_oracle wrote: Sat Oct 24, 2020 10:26 am All it takes is an riaa dmca notice to gitlab...

Where there's a will... maybe it will end up on IRC or Pirate Bay.

Posted: **Sat Oct 24, 2020 12:19 pm**

I would think a dmca notice would be a little murky anyway, given that as far as I know, youtube-dl doesn't download drm'd content.

Posted: **Sat Oct 24, 2020 12:29 pm**

dolphin_oracle wrote: Sat Oct 24, 2020 12:19 pm I would think a dmca notice would be a little murky anyway, given that as far as I know, youtube-dl doesn't download drm'd content.

Does it break Youtube terms of use? Can DMCA notice use that?

Posted: **Sat Oct 24, 2020 12:41 pm**

The RIAA's contention is that youtube-dl is designed to circumvent the YouTube Standard License under which their content is only licensed for streaming from YouTube.
I think they have a reasonably good legal case here - particularly because of the examples the developers chose to include with the source code.
Just as going to a movie doesn't license you record the movie to play later at home, streaming from YouTube doesn't license you to save a copy to play later.

Relevant portion of RIAA DCMA takedown notice wrote: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 example, as shown on Exhibit A, the source code expressly suggests its use to copy and/or distribute the following copyrighted works owned by our member companies:

• Icona Pop – I Love It (feat. Charli XCX) [Official Video], owned by Warner Music Group
• Justin Timberlake – Tunnel Vision (Explicit), owned by Sony Music Group
• Taylor Swift – Shake it Off, owned/exclusively licensed by Universal Music Group

The source code notes that the Icona Pop work identified above is under the YouTube Standard license, which expressly restricts access to copyrighted works only for streaming on YouTube and prohibits their further reproduction or distribution without consent of the copyright owner; that the Justin Timberlake work identified above is under an additional age protection identifier; and that the request for the Taylor Swift work identified above is to obtain, without authorization of the copyright owner or YouTube, an M4A audio file from the audiovisual work in question.

We have a good faith belief that this activity is not authorized by the copyright owner, its agent, or the law. We assert that the information in this notification is accurate, based upon the data available to us.

Posted: **Sat Oct 24, 2020 12:57 pm**

So, time to put the pitchforks away?

Posted: **Sat Oct 24, 2020 6:05 pm**

Adrian wrote: Sat Oct 24, 2020 12:57 pm So, time to put the pitchforks away?

It was pretty dumb of the youtube-dl devs to use those examples. Time for them to rise again with renamed software using CC licensed examples.

Posted: **Mon Oct 26, 2020 7:41 am**

This is gonna break youtube-dl-gui and similar apps that rely on it.

Posted: **Mon Oct 26, 2020 8:04 am**

I wonder why they picked on youtube-dl (apart from the obvious example howtos) when there are dozens of Firefox Add-ons and presumably Chrome ones too which do exactly the same thing?

Posted: **Mon Oct 26, 2020 9:52 am**

Stevo wrote: Mon Oct 26, 2020 7:41 am This is gonna break youtube-dl-gui and similar apps that rely on it.

It already has for playx. But I'll wait for a fix. After the dust settles and some changes are being made. Things will just be up and running again. Maybe under a different name and maybe rewritten in a different format. Just have to wait and see, the ending results.

Posted: **Wed Oct 28, 2020 7:59 am**

handy wrote: Sat Oct 24, 2020 7:54 am Where there is a will...
https://gitlab.com/MariaTelos/youtube-d ... /README.md

Looks like, there is plenty of will

If you look at current trending for Python packages, out of top 5, 4 of them are yt-download clones lol
(assuming with necessary modifications)

https://github.com/trending/python?sinc ... ge_code=en

Posted: **Wed Oct 28, 2020 8:04 am**

Github is owned by M$, I wonder If they couldn't have fought for it...

Posted: **Wed Oct 28, 2020 9:02 am**

I think that's a valid question especially considering there have been reports that the documents do not constitute a legitimate DMCA take down: https://twitter.com/xor/status/1319738279772770308.

Posted: **Wed Oct 28, 2020 9:41 am**

Sparky wrote: Wed Oct 28, 2020 8:04 am Github is owned by M$, I wonder If they couldn't have fought for it...

MS is member of RIAA though...

Posted: **Wed Oct 28, 2020 11:53 am**

This article provides more details on an analysis of the request as it was acted on my MS/GitHub:

https://www.techdirt.com/articles/20201 ... oved.shtml

Posted: **Wed Oct 28, 2020 6:34 pm**

I don't understand why people think it's okay to record copyrighted material from YouTube. It's stealing unless you're choosing Public Domain, Copyleft or Creative Commons material. You are stealing from songwriters and artists (among others) who are paid by each view/stream. How would you feel if part or all of your income was stolen?

Posted: **Wed Oct 28, 2020 6:38 pm**

jordansc wrote: Wed Oct 28, 2020 6:34 pm I don't understand why people think it's okay to download copyrighted material from YouTube. It's stealing unless you're choosing Public Domain, Copyleft or Creative Commons material. You are stealing from songwriters and artists (among others) who are paid by each view. How would you feel if part or all of your income was stolen?

You are assuming the worst case scenario.
I give my right for people to access my info, and yes, I do have content on YT.

Posted: **Wed Oct 28, 2020 6:47 pm**

When you watch something on youtube it is downloaded onto your machine (though not in a format that you can replay).

I download with youtube-dl so I can view the video. The videos that I watch aren't copyrighted, or from any of the private channels that you have to sign up for.

I download these vids as I can't watch them any other way due to my use of a combination of privacy tools that g**gle (among others) don't like.

I expect that g**gle would be quite happy with the current legal situation of youtube-dl as g**gle don't give anything away that doesn't bring profit to them in some form or another.

Posted: **Wed Oct 28, 2020 7:10 pm**

Yes!!!!!!

Posted: **Wed Oct 28, 2020 7:46 pm**

jordansc wrote: Wed Oct 28, 2020 6:34 pm I don't understand why people think it's okay to record copyrighted material from YouTube. It's stealing unless you're choosing Public Domain, Copyleft or Creative Commons material. You are stealing from songwriters and artists (among others) who are paid by each view/stream. How would you feel if part or all of your income was stolen?

I can care less for copyright music. You are assuming a lot. On YT you can find political commentaries, market/economy commentaries etc... from bloggers who want to be heard and who are way more valuable and insightful, than say MSM. I don't have time sitting by computer watching/listening this material. But when I'm doing certain chores or hike, run, on a bicycle, drive in the car... that's perfect time for me. So, I almost daily DL and convert material I'm interested into MP3, upload on my music player and then listen to it, when doing previous mentioned tasks. Thanks to programs like yt-download or Clipgrab I can do this.

Posted: **Wed Oct 28, 2020 8:23 pm**

Further to the above. Isn't it literally the case where site like YouTube, and every other, don't have the right to force your browser and by extension your operating system and computer hardware, to do anything or prevent you from interacting with the site on your browser, operating system and computer hardware in any way you please?

Posted: **Wed Oct 28, 2020 8:26 pm**

Slightly OT but related..

I see both sides of the issue..

I have copyrighted original music on Youtube and all other major streaming platforms and any cover material I've produced I have bought the licenses to distribute it legally, Even as a (tiny insignificant) artist I try to not be a hypocrite to other artists..

On the other hand Concert Footage stuff is disappearing from Youtube at an alarming rate never to be seen again, for that reason i have used youtube-dl to preserve some of this stuff before it is gone forever. As an example i'm a huge fan of bluesman Freddie King who died in 1976, some of the YT content of his has been pulled and the DVD's that the content came from have more than quadrupled in price on Amazon since DVD's are now so archaic. As a fan this is very troubling. Anyone who follows Rick Beato or Lee Sklar will also see that even somebody using 20 seconds of copyrighted music in an educational video to promote and evangelize the work of the original artist is in jeopardy of getting their video pulled.. Lee Sklar is playing along to James Taylor songs he was the session bassist on for the original recordings to show aspiring bassists how it was done and his stuff is routinely pulled.

Money is money and rights are rights but the loss of educational value is an intangible cost as well.. Discuss...:-)

Posted: **Wed Oct 28, 2020 8:56 pm**

Discuss what? The freedom and glory of the free?

Posted: **Wed Oct 28, 2020 9:08 pm**

If the US had sane copyright laws much of this content would be in the public domain by now. OT example: Project Gutenberg has diaries written by American Civil War, Boer War and WWi soldiers and officers but none from WWII because they're still under copyright. This is madness. Freddie King's material should be available now that it's 44 years since he died but we have another 55 years to wait (lifetime plus 99 years.) Not only will much of his material be lost by then but most of us won't be around to hear it either. And the sad fact is most artists don't even own the copyrights to their own music, the big labels do. That's why Prince changed his name to that symbol (his label claimed legal ownership of the name Prince even though that was his real given name so they said they also owned music produced with that name) and why John Fogarty (CCR's front man) stopped recording for so many years until his contract with his label expired. (Then he released a big hit about baseball!)

Posted: **Wed Oct 28, 2020 9:31 pm**

jordansc wrote: Wed Oct 28, 2020 6:34 pm I don't understand why people think it's okay to record copyrighted material from YouTube. It's stealing unless you're choosing Public Domain, Copyleft or Creative Commons material. You are stealing from songwriters and artists (among others) who are paid by each view/stream. How would you feel if part or all of your income was stolen?

I think that technically you are right, but that there are a lot of mitigating circumstances. Much of what I view is not copyrighted, and quite a bit of it has already been unjustly demonetized by google. Some things I've downloaded I have hard copy of, bought and paid for, but I prefer the convenience of digital. I have made direct donations to some creators, knowing that I am not supporting them through ad revenue. And some others, yes, I have downloaded and used without remuneration. I don't think this is a monolithic situation. And the part of the funds that would go to google I do not worry about; they are already too big and too abusive of the power they have. I am trying to use youtube alternatives more, and that goes for other google products as well.

Posted: **Wed Oct 28, 2020 9:39 pm**

It's not hard at all to find alternatives for Google's services.

Posted: **Thu Oct 29, 2020 10:31 am**

It's important to remember that there is no restriction on how your computer interacts with a website. This is the same rules which allow ad blockers. If one wants to use a tool that targets *only* the multimedia content from a website and discards the rest (as the mpv player does with media streaming using youtube-dl as a backend) that is perfectly within ones rights.

Posted: **Mon Nov 02, 2020 9:42 am**

The other day I was doing some chores, and I was going to listen to one video that is over 2 hours long. The stream was keep being interrupted, so much that it was not listenable any more. I downloaded the whole thing with ClipGrab within minute or two and then I could finally listen to the show without any interruptions. Since everything was downloaded so fast, I don't think it was my internet connection a reason for interruptions.

Just another example, how useful are these downloaders.

Posted: **Mon Nov 16, 2020 5:16 pm**

GitHub/Microsoft has 'reinstated' youtube-dl: https://github.blog/2020-11-16-standing ... l-is-back/

Posted: **Mon Nov 16, 2020 5:33 pm**

https://yro.slashdot.org/story/20/11/16 ... tervention

The news for nerds...stuff that matters.
Looks like the EFF stepped in, and is putting up a million bucks for defense of open source projects against RIAA bogus take-downs.

Posted: **Mon Nov 16, 2020 9:00 pm**

You mean the PR talking heads over at GitHub aren't the heroes of the story..? Shocking.

Posted: **Tue Nov 17, 2020 6:57 pm**

entropyfoe wrote: Mon Nov 16, 2020 5:33 pm https://yro.slashdot.org/story/20/11/16 ... tervention

The news for nerds...stuff that matters.
Looks like the EFF stepped in, and is putting up a million bucks for defense of open source projects against RIAA bogus take-downs.

Nice!

Posted: **Tue Nov 17, 2020 7:38 pm**

Github has reinstated youtube-dl and prates about standing up for developers: https://github.blog/2020-11-16-standing ... l-is-back/

Which all shows that the Digital Millennium Copyright Act is a bad law. It mandates content removal based on mere accusation then places the burden of proof on the accused to prove their innocence. IANAL and haven't read the actual text of the DMCA in a long time but regarding takedowns it would seem that the level of evidence that must be presented for a takedown request to be enforced is far too low. There's a photographer with her own website that received DMCA takedown notices for her own photos because Getty Images falsely claimed to own them. I once got a takedown notice for a video I posted on YouTube for having someone's copyrighted music in it. It had birds singing in the background, was all, and I never should have been served with a takedown request. In neither case were the accusers seemingly required to show any evidence regarding their claims of ownership, their mere "say-so" seemed to be enough. Bad law.

Posted: **Tue Nov 17, 2020 9:04 pm**

JayM wrote: Tue Nov 17, 2020 7:38 pmThere's a photographer with her own website that received DMCA takedown notices for her own photos because Getty Images falsely claimed to own them. I once got a takedown notice for a video I posted on YouTube for having someone's copyrighted music in it. It had birds singing in the background, was all, and I never should have been served with a takedown request. In neither case were the accusers seemingly required to show any evidence regarding their claims of ownership, their mere "say-so" seemed to be enough. Bad law.

Crazy times we are living in!

Posted: **Wed Nov 18, 2020 7:28 am**

I was hopping that the EFF would sick their lawyers onto this one. :)
It is a perfect candidate imho.

MX Linux Forum

youtube-dl no more?

youtube-dl no more?

Re: youtube-dl no more?

Re: youtube-dl no more?

Re: youtube-dl no more?

Re: youtube-dl no more?

Re: youtube-dl no more?

Re: youtube-dl no more?

Re: youtube-dl no more?

Re: youtube-dl no more?

Re: youtube-dl no more?

Re: youtube-dl no more?

Re: youtube-dl no more?

Re: youtube-dl no more?

Re: youtube-dl no more?

Re: youtube-dl no more?

Re: youtube-dl no more?

Re: youtube-dl no more?

Re: youtube-dl no more?

Re: youtube-dl no more?

Re: youtube-dl no more?

Re: youtube-dl no more?

Re: youtube-dl no more?

Re: youtube-dl no more?

Re: youtube-dl no more?

Re: youtube-dl no more?

Re: youtube-dl no more?

Re: youtube-dl no more?

Re: youtube-dl no more?

Re: youtube-dl no more?

Re: youtube-dl no more?

Re: youtube-dl no more?

Re: youtube-dl no more?

Re: youtube-dl no more?

Re: youtube-dl no more?

Re: youtube-dl no more?

Re: youtube-dl no more?

Re: youtube-dl no more?

Re: youtube-dl no more?