Hacker News Re-Imagined

YouTube-dl has received a DMCA takedown from RIAA

  • 4240 points
  • 1 year ago

  • @phantop
  • Created a post

YouTube-dl has received a DMCA takedown from RIAA


@read_if_gay_ 1 year

Replying to @phantop 🎙

Github has received a takedown request for the youtube-dl repo and forks, not youtube-dl itself, correct?

Reply


@fsociety2020 1 year

Replying to @phantop 🎙

Should all just clone it and host it in every possible place and on servers outside the US and give them the big middle finger to go F themselves.

Reply


@getpolarized 1 year

Replying to @phantop 🎙

What I think is hilarious is how many takedown notices they've received!

https://github.com/github/dmca

Reply


@danmg 1 year

Replying to @phantop 🎙

Youtube-dl (2020) would be an easier case to present to the public than DeCSS (2000).

Everyone knows what Youtube is. It's easy to understand the utility of being able to download a video from Youtube to save it on your computer. If they didn't already know this was possible to do, they'd immediately want to start using it as soon as you explained it was possible.

DeCSS was exploiting a weak encryption scheme's weak key distribution scheme. Where the only final explanation for why this matters is that it can be used to rip off DVDs.

Reply


@precommunicator 1 year

Replying to @phantop 🎙

I really hope the author will send a counter-notice.

Reply


@jonathan-neil 1 year

Replying to @phantop 🎙

They've learned absolutely nothing from two decades of failed wars vs torrenting.

Reply


@q3k 1 year

Replying to @phantop 🎙

Git mirror: https://code.hackerspace.pl/q3k/youtube-dl

This is master on 4eda10499e8db831167062b0e0dbc7d10d34c1f9, retrieved from gitee.com, and is the last known hash from Google Webcache [1].

Clone, verify and rehost.

[1] - https://webcache.googleusercontent.com/search?q=cache:o7ilf8...

Reply


@hadcomplained 1 year

Replying to @phantop 🎙

I sometimes imagine how wonderful it'd be if there were a viable alternative to the Web that is decentralized and infeasible to censor, only to realize that how great it is for the freedom, is the exact reason why it doesn't exist. It's just too inconvenient for those in power. That might be why Tor was funded by the government. Its primary functionality is to strengthen the existing Web, rather than to be some competing force to the Web.

Reply


@neiman 1 year

Replying to @phantop 🎙

But it can also be sued for downloading uncopyrighted material. It's like submitting DCMA for Office Word because people can use it for creating pirate copies of Harry Potter.

Reply


@sylvain_kerkour 1 year

Replying to @phantop 🎙

As a good internet citizen I have only one question: Where can I find a mirror to fork to preserve this piece of software?

Reply


@jimnotgym 1 year

Replying to @phantop 🎙

I can't find reference to who is going to defend this? Is EFF going to pick it up? Can we donate?

Reply


@anseed 1 year

Replying to @phantop 🎙

Good

Reply


@3np 1 year

Replying to @phantop 🎙

It's outrageous indeed that GH/MS is complying.

It's not that far from targeting wget or curl, were it not for the widespread use of them in industry.

Reply


@Kim_Bruning 1 year

Replying to @phantop 🎙

Lesson learned: always use Creative Commons licensed data to demo your multimedia tools. Else people get the wrong idea.

Some examples for youtube-dl might be:

* https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=aqz-KE-bpKQ Big buck bunny

* https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=eRsGyueVLvQ Sintel

* https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=WhWc3b3KhnY Spring

In fact, youtube actually allows you to filter by CC, so there's never a reason not to!

Reply


@crazygringo 1 year

Replying to @phantop 🎙

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....

Reply


@sakoht 1 year

Replying to @phantop 🎙

Setting aside the evils of the DMCA itself:

Seems clearly that if youtube authorizes downloads, then people shouldn't put things on youtube they don't want downloaded?

The takedown notices should be going to youtube. But of course they want to use youtube to promote themselves.

Reply


@Pxtl 1 year

Replying to @phantop 🎙

Does YouTube embed any copyright metadata on the videos? An improved product could check for that first and prompt the user with a legal confirmation that they have the right to download the content if it was marked as copyrighted.

Reply


@cft 1 year

Replying to @phantop 🎙

This needs free legal assistance from EFF and needs to go to court if RIAA is actually ready to litigate this

Reply


@josteink 1 year

Replying to @phantop 🎙

Sounds like it’s about time youtube-dl moves to IPFS.

Reply


@apetresc 1 year

Replying to @phantop 🎙

I've been hoarding significant YouTube channels for years, at a cost of many terabytes of HDD space. Even though they were always available for free, I was always betting on the fact that YouTube's status as being incredibly easy to archive would not last forever.

I feel vindicated, but also sad that the end of this particular era has finally arrived :(

Reply


@bryanrasmussen 1 year

Replying to @phantop 🎙

So if you did not fork youtube-dl but instead had cloned it, changed the repo to be the private nootube-dl and pushed it there - would github detect it was the same code and also take it down?

Reply


@how2draw 1 year

Replying to @phantop 🎙

Here's what you can do:

1. Clone the repository. Make an insignificant change to the initial commit in order to change all commit hashes. Push to github as a new repository.

2. Create a password "protected" zip file (or smaller volumes) containing the repository. Use a password that's easily found in common wordlists. Commit it to another project and push to github.

Microsoft GitHub may be centralized, but it's not omniscient. RIAA may be a control freak, but it's not omnipotent. Let information be free for all.

Reply


@Thaxll 1 year

Replying to @phantop 🎙

If the README stated that you can download free to use video such as: https://www.youtube.com/c/VideoLibraryNocopyrightFootage/vid...

You're out of troubles?

Reply


@cwkoss 1 year

Replying to @phantop 🎙

Stuff like this is why I consider it unethical to pay for recorded music, unless distributed directly by the artist. Haven't bought music from a major distributor since I was a teenager.

I don't want my money funding this sort of overreaching censorship.

Reply


@banana_giraffe 1 year

Replying to @phantop 🎙

Ironically, I've heard of video takedown service that this has broken.

Reply


@ColanR 1 year

Replying to @phantop 🎙

So it looks like the takedown notice has nothing to do with the actual developer of youtube-dl. I.e., the developer could distribute their code somewhere else and the RIAA would be left playing whack-a-mole.

Reply


@andy_ppp 1 year

Replying to @phantop 🎙

I find this amazing, essentially Google has been scraping every piece of content they can get their hands on, when a few individuals decide to get data, that wasn’t even created by YouTube, they get take down notices. The more I think about it hypocrisy should be a defence against these things.

Reply


@noobermin 1 year

Replying to @phantop 🎙

Just a couple of days ago, I replied[0] to a comment about how the RIAA/MPAA won. Looks like I was right. They just made peace with youtube and now have them enforce their rights, despite the silliness of this "takedown"

Reply


@maledorak 1 year

Replying to @phantop 🎙



@sweetlucipher 1 year

Replying to @phantop 🎙

Can't I just FORK it and change the Readme and/or tests to not include references to what could be constituted as infringing acts, and purposely state that the purpose of MY FORK is to download YouTube videos that are in the public domain?

If it's been taken down I am sure it will pop up on some torrent. The authors and all those who have contributed to it have copies.

How can a court tell me not to publish generally useful software with a legitimate intent?

Reply


@cphajduk 1 year

Replying to @phantop 🎙

On a technical side-note...

Would it be possible to host a Git server on an IPFS distributed system?

Reply


@easton 1 year

Replying to @phantop 🎙

I'm sure someone's already said it, but if you want the source tree with no history, it's still available on PyPI: https://pypi.org/project/youtube_dl/#files

Reply


@oleg131 1 year

Replying to @phantop 🎙

I couldn't find a copy for a binary on gitea, so I tried Wayback machine:

https://web.archive.org/web/*/https://github.com/ytdl-org/yo...

E.g. the first snapshot redirects you to https://web.archive.org/web/20200923163719/https://github-pr... and it works.

Reply


@neonate 1 year

Replying to @phantop 🎙

Could you just make a fork, take out the offending samples, and call it youtube-ld?

Reply


@Shared404 1 year

Replying to @phantop 🎙

I have Linux and Windows binaries.

If anyone wants them, feel free to shoot me an email.

Reply


@arendtio 1 year

Replying to @phantop 🎙

...and I always though youtube-dl was the tool someone built so that Youtube was in compliance with the GDPA and let us export our videos ;-)

scnr

Reply


@aquova 1 year

Replying to @phantop 🎙

While its good to get a backup of the source code, youtube-dl is one of those projects that quickly becomes useless as Google mixes stuff around within YouTube, which they like to do. Without an active developer base, the project will quickly become less and less effective, which is one of the big concerns IMO about this lawsuit.

Reply


@shmerl 1 year

Replying to @phantop 🎙

So what's the latest update on it. Did they counter claim? Did anyone set up a fork repo?

Reply


@ikeboy 1 year

Replying to @phantop 🎙

Disclaimer: IANAL.

The legal reasoning here is shaky. Notice that they cite a German court and assert that the law there is materially the same as that in the US.

I did some research on this specific issue at one point, and I'm skeptical that Youtube's controls qualify under the law in question.

RIAA cites two sections of the law: >the provision or trafficking of the source code violates 17 USC §§1201(a)(2) and 1201(b)(1).

It almost certainly doesn't violate 1201(a)(2), which is for access controls. This is intended to be used by someone who already has access to Youtube, so no access controls are bypassed.

R. CHRISTOPHER GOODWIN & ASSOCIATES, INC. v. SEARCH, INC., Dist. Court, ED Louisiana 2019:

>While the user id/password combination required for access was surely a "technological measure" that controlled access to the works at issue, Pevny did not circumvent that measure. She validly accessed the system using her id/password combination while she was still an employee with Plaintiff. Even if the use that she made of that access is not something that Plaintiff would have authorized her to do, i.e., copy the materials at issue, it remains that Pevny's alleged abuse of her logon privileges does not rise to the level of descrambling, decrypting, or otherwise to avoiding, bypassing, removing, deactivating, or impairing anything. As the district court observed in Digital Drilling Data Systems, LLC v. Petrolink Services, Inc., No. 4:15-CV-02172, 2018 WL 2267139, at *14 (S.D. Tex. May 16, 2018), many different district courts have held that using the correct username and password to access a copyrighted work, even without authorization to do so, does not constitute circumvention under § 1201(a) of the DMCA.

Youtube-dl either involves access to files that don't require a login, or it uses your password / cookies to access the file, so it doesn't bypass access controls.

The claim under 1201(b)(1), which is for copy controls, has more potential.

There are the subsections:

>(A)is primarily designed or produced for the purpose of circumventing protection afforded by a technological measure that effectively protects a right of a copyright owner under this title in a work or a portion thereof; >(B)has only limited commercially significant purpose or use other than to circumvent protection afforded by a technological measure that effectively protects a right of a copyright owner under this title in a work or a portion thereof; or >(C)is marketed by that person or another acting in concert with that person with that person’s knowledge for use in circumventing protection afforded by a technological measure that effectively protects a right of a copyright owner under this title in a work or a portion thereof.

A and B clearly don't apply. The primary purpose of youtube-dl isn't to download copyrighted content, but simply to download Youtube videos, whether they're copyrighted or not. There's clearly more than limited legitimate uses (such as downloaded public domain videos.) The question here is about C - there's an arguable case that the examples in the repo that this letter cites are "marketing" usage for infringing purposes. I'm somewhat skeptical that counts as "marketing", however, and it could be easily remedied by removing those examples or replacing with public domain examples.

Reply


@bryanrasmussen 1 year

Replying to @phantop 🎙

So recently I asked if Unix v6 is the "To Kill a Mockingbird" of computer science, then what is the Huckleberry Finn. Ref: https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=24856047

This thing with YouTube-dl makes me consider that one quality that a "The Adventures of Huckleberry Finn" of computer science should possess is having been banned. Of course YouTube-dl might not be the Huckleberry Finn, but maybe it is something like The Satanic Verses (which I was never a fan of).

Reply


@mhandley 1 year

Replying to @phantop 🎙

You can use Chrome to download from Youtube - you just need to know the temporary URL. One way to get this is to play the Youtube video in VLC - the media information window will tell you the temporary URL, and then you can use Chrome to download the content. So maybe the RIAA should issue a takedown request against the company that makes Chrome?

Reply


@jaspergilley 1 year

Replying to @phantop 🎙

You can download the most recent version of the YouTube-DL code from Wayback Machine here: https://web.archive.org/web/20201018144703/https://github.co...

Fuck the RIAA

Reply


@bonoboTP 1 year

Replying to @phantop 🎙

Even Google Research themselves use youtube-dl when assembling computer vision datasets. The only way to work on their data and reproduce the results is through youtube-dl, as video datasets are often only distributed as URLs and timestamps, and even the example codes use youtube-dl.

I wonder how this will impact the AI research community if there's some FUD around this tool.

Generally scraping is a gray area. I know researchers who scraped Google street view for large areas to train AI models without Googles approval and got hired by Google for their impressive AI skills instead of threatened.

I know researchers are a tiny group compared to consumers, but it's still interesting I think.

Reply


@cuckgangster5 1 year

Replying to @phantop 🎙

Fuck riaa, I'm going to open an offshore youtube-dl, and another one: a decentralised and blockchain hosted based youtube-dl. Good luck.

Reply


@xvilka 1 year

Replying to @phantop 🎙

They can just move the project to IPFS[1] then, it has support for Git repositories [2].

[1] https://ipfs.io/

[2] https://docs.ipfs.io/how-to/host-git-style-repo/

Reply


@black_puppydog 1 year

Replying to @phantop 🎙

Your weekly reminder that

1. You should not have your development process on a centralized platform, at least not if you're doing anything that smells of copyright issues

2. If you do host on a centralized platform, have regular, decentralized backups of code and issue tracking.

3. Also, avoid US-centric hosting for this kind of thing. But really, refer to 1.

Reply


@whatsmyusername 1 year

Replying to @phantop 🎙

This will do nothing. The tool will instantly be hosted outside the US. Even if the developer is American it's just going to get instantly scooped by someone else.

Reply


@grawprog 1 year

Replying to @phantop 🎙

So why does the Recording Industry Association of America get to decide whether a tool for downloading content on a service that is produced by people around the world and released under many different licenses exists or not?

The RIAA and America in general has no right to police the rest of the world.

Reply


@siliconc0w 1 year

Replying to @phantop 🎙

Time to upload youtube-dl-legal a computer program created for the express purpose of downloading only videos with permissible licenses. The readme shall note that any use of youtube-dl-legal to download illegal videos is expressly forbidden and even thinking about using it in this way is thoughtcrime of the most serious degree.

Reply


@dang 1 year

Replying to @phantop 🎙

All: don't miss that there are multiple pages of comments in this thread. That's what the More link at the bottom points to. Or click here:

https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=24872911&p=2

https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=24872911&p=3

https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=24872911&p=4

https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=24872911&p=5

Reply


@riclad 1 year

Replying to @phantop 🎙

What does it matter if I watch a song on YouTube or just dl the video. Mp4 and watch it, The riaa might say the reasons the videos are on YouTube is they promote the artist like old videos on MTV and someone gets paid ad revenue , In theory someone could just use a pc dl 1000s of videos put em on a pc and avoid watching ads Also video streams count to get a song in the charts and the riaa employs lawyers so they have to do something to justify their wages even if it will have no effect on the music marketplace or the behavior of the average music fan

Reply


@neves 1 year

Replying to @phantop 🎙

BTW, I just installed it using `choco install youtube-downloader`. Nice to have while they don't find a new location.

It also showcases a marvelous advantage of using git as a VCS, they automatically have multiple backups and can easily transport the project. And it showcases that all the other project info, like issues and comments should also be under version control and downloaded in developers machines. You can't depend on an external service for your project.

BTW, is it possible to use GitHub features in a distribute way? E.g.: create issues in my machine and pushing it to the server?

Reply


@francisperron 1 year

Replying to @phantop 🎙

They should take down all browsers and Internet we can use it too download stuff... this is so stupid. Don't want your stuff to be downloaded, don't put it online.

Reply


@anta40 1 year

Replying to @phantop 🎙

The latest version is: 2020.09.20, yes? I already grabbed the source code days ago, but forgot the grab the Windows binary. Anyone keep the binary, or perhaps simply have to compile it?

:D

Reply


@Conan_Kudo 1 year

Replying to @phantop 🎙

This is the first time I've read a DMCA notice that also references EU Directives and German law too (admittedly it's a thin note saying it's materially equivalent to U.S.C.). Is that even meaningful in a DMCA takedown notice?

Reply


@varispeed 1 year

Replying to @phantop 🎙

What if I remember the song I listened to on YouTube and I can remember any copyrighted material? Are they going to serve me with DMCA to disable part of my brain? These organisations are ridiculous.

Reply


@2OEH8eoCRo0 1 year

Replying to @phantop 🎙

That's pretty stupid. You don't takedown technologies that could be used maliciously or we wouldn't have anything.

I'm worried about Newpipe now, it's been a life changer.

Reply


@ohyash 1 year

Replying to @phantop 🎙

Not just users, this is a good nightmare for a lot of projects that were relying on yt-dl (maybe for other features than downloading)

And even a lot of unofficial libraries that allowed easier yt access. Dead in a go.

Do we have a cli alternative that does everything of yt-dl except the video download part?

Reply


@mikece 1 year

Replying to @phantop 🎙

Perhaps it's time to take a closer look at projects like Fossil that combine distributed version control with wiki and issues tracker built in. If the devs behind youtube-dl were using Fossil then picking up right where the DMCA leaves them is no sweat.

https://fossil-scm.org/home/doc/trunk/www/index.wiki

Reply


@rhabarba 1 year

Replying to @phantop 🎙

Ahh, centralized version control. Such a good idea.

Reply


@ddavis 1 year

Replying to @phantop 🎙

This is really dumb. By the logic of the letter all that needs to be done is change the README file.

Reply


@ianlevesque 1 year

Replying to @phantop 🎙

Have they countered the claim per DMCA? So much ink spilled on this but there’s a process to fight erroneous removals like this.

Reply


@qwerty456127 1 year

Replying to @phantop 🎙

Is there still no safe alternative to GitHub?

Reply


@Aeolun 1 year

Replying to @phantop 🎙

I don’t follow, the argument seems to be along the lines of:

Guns can be used to shoot people, they’re explicitly advertised as being for shooting people, shooting people is a crime. We request you stop selling guns.

It’s all just a tad misplaced.

Reply


@krob 1 year

Replying to @phantop 🎙

I think that they should update the readme and rebase the history and eliminate any references to the original copyrighted material of the readme file. possibly even making a request of GitHub to help them clean the repo or evidence of any logging information with regard to the copyrighted content. I think it would be relatively easy to argue that a web browser would be guilty of every single little thing that can be done through YouTube DL binary in the right hands. The only copyrightable information that YouTube - DL offers is an instruction set or a direct correlation to the fact that they can use this tool to do some things that are implicitly prohibited.

Reply


@theknocker 1 year

Replying to @phantop 🎙

How do I notify the RIAA that they can keep their private property out of my computer's temp folder then?

Reply


@dredmorbius 1 year

Replying to @phantop 🎙

Strategically / tactically, the most interesting aspect of the RIAA attack on youtube-dl to me is that it puts Microsoft on the spot to show its true colours. Is it Friend of Free Software, or Copyright Maximalist?

Reply


@jaspergilley 1 year

Replying to @phantop 🎙

Ok, so who's building a distributed, cryptographic, uncensorable version of GitHub?

Reply


@erk__ 1 year

Replying to @phantop 🎙

This is not a new thing, DMCA was also used to take down specific plugins on Streamlink (tool to download livestreams)

https://github.com/streamlink/streamlink/issues/1493

Reply


@vernie 1 year

Replying to @phantop 🎙

Ha I'd nearly forgotten about the RIAA, thanks for reminding me to re-up my EFF donation.

Reply


@shiado 1 year

Replying to @phantop 🎙

The "under penalty of perjury" part of DMCA has always been fascinating to me. Has there ever been a single case of this being enforced against inappropriate DMCA takedowns? What's next? DMCA against Intel for making a chip that can facilitate copyright infringement? Maybe a power company for providing power to the machine that could do it?

Reply


@m0zg 1 year

Replying to @phantop 🎙

Thanks to this takedown, hundreds of thousands of people will find out they can actually _download_ YT videos. Thanks, RIAA!

Reply


@keyme 1 year

Replying to @phantop 🎙

How is this not perjury again? They need to be punished for this harshly.

Reply


@vermooten 1 year

Replying to @phantop 🎙

To misquote Richard E Grant: Let the forking begin!

Reply


@ExcavateGrandMa 1 year

Replying to @phantop 🎙

OKAY OKAY MEAT & MEAT...

Let's supress the cutlery... for the danger it brings!

And you'll look so well... eating like a savages!

Reply


@rgovostes 1 year

Replying to @phantop 🎙

YouTube-dl is a great tool that I've found use for a dozen times, and not once to download music or music videos. (Note that it works on sites beyond YouTube.) This takedown interferes with a number of legitimate uses that are completely independent of the RIAA's objectives.

Reply


@musicale 1 year

Replying to @phantop 🎙

Why do I always find out about cool and useful things as soon as they are about to be shut down? ;-(

Reply


@em3rgent0rdr 1 year

Replying to @phantop 🎙

Isn't there a 1st-amendment exception for code? The code isn't violating any copyright.

Reply


@xvilka 1 year

Replying to @phantop 🎙

They could also try to setup a mirror at https://gitee.com/ which is more user friendly than GitHub, as this case confirms.

Reply


@dfsegoat 1 year

Replying to @phantop 🎙

Funny this happens right as everyone is scrambling to save JRE episodes, before he goes to Spotify.

Reply


@baldfat 1 year

Replying to @phantop 🎙

I warned everyone The Fight Club Rule needed to be in effect. There is no Youtube-dl

Reply


@vram22 1 year

Replying to @phantop 🎙

As a technical aside (to the main topic of this HN thread), I had written a blog post some years ago, describing some uses of youtube-dl, and some commentary giving an overview of what its source does:

youtube-dl, a YouTube downloader in Python:

https://jugad2.blogspot.com/2013/03/youtube-dl-yourube-downl...

Reply


@SoylentYellow 1 year

Replying to @phantop 🎙

The only way to fight DMCA abuse is through a lawsuit. Hopefully they setup a legal fund, because I would certainly donate.

Reply


@mmaunder 1 year

Replying to @phantop 🎙

Who is the defendant here? Do they have resources to take this to court? If not, is there any movement on raising a legal defense fund and finding competent counsel? Anyone from the ACLU team here, and interested in weighing in or at least bringing this to your leadership for consideration?

Reply


@scastillo 1 year

Replying to @phantop 🎙

This is not youtube-dl please don't fork it or send pull requests back. Don't click this link: https://github.com/scastillo/not-youtube-dl

Reply


@codecamper 1 year

Replying to @phantop 🎙

fork

Reply


@Kliment 1 year

Replying to @phantop 🎙

Can we, as a community, cause damage and annoyance to RIAA executives and their member company executives? Here are some ideas:

- Ban them from dating sites

- Ban their kids from instagram/tiktok/whatever

- Have web shops show all items as out of stock for them

- Refuse to do business with them or their families, in general

- subscribe them to real life spam

- send their office envelopes of glitter

I'm sure others can think of other methods. Maybe it's just vindictiveness on my part, but maybe it will make them reconsider their life choices if said choices came at a cost of permanent inconvenience.

Reply


@bonsi 1 year

Replying to @phantop 🎙

Its quite irrelevant - seems like "forbidding knifes because they can be used as a weapon" or "banning port scanners because of security reasons".

Reply


@boogies 1 year

Replying to @phantop 🎙

Hope this motivates a few more free software devs to move away to a free host, at least apart from GH mirrors for exposure.

IUUC importing this to GitLab would have taken ~½dozen clicks and saved the open issues, etc.?

Reply


@dpumpshitlord 1 year

Replying to @phantop 🎙

RIAA is outta pocket, tell em to eat your ass

Reply


@weyland 1 year

Replying to @phantop 🎙

So, are they going to also issue a takedown for YouTube Premium next? Premium allows you to watch/listen without ads and also allows you to download videos for offline use. If I pay for YouTube Premium, there should be no problem with me using youtube-dl to timeshift the content I've already paid for. It's no different than using a DVR to record a show off a cable channel I pay to subscribe to.

Reply


@reggieband 1 year

Replying to @phantop 🎙

It is a bit of a tough question. How would I feel about someone borrowing a book from a library and then photocopying it to keep a local copy? If the intent was to re-distribute then I would not feel comfortable allowing it. However, if the proposed remedy was to ban personal ownership of photocopiers I would not even consider that a valid approach. But would I expect I could keep my own photocopied version instead of paying retail price for the book? And what if a purpose built photocopier was designed and marketed for the express purpose of photocopying books from the library?

My personal feeling, and obviously not a legal opinion or even morally infallible in any sense, is that storing a local copy of digital content that has been consumed should be allowed. Where it becomes grey (or my feeling tends towards disallowing) is if I share or re-broadcast that content in any form.

That is, I feel the DMCA is in the wrong here. Unless they can prove intent to re-distribute it feels wrong that they can ban my ability to maintain a copy for myself. I believe it ought to be a right to store such content locally.

Reply


@02020202 1 year

Replying to @phantop 🎙

in other words, the data that you download from the network called internet does not belong to you. THE DATA ITSELF.

Reply


@mosselman 1 year

Replying to @phantop 🎙

Damn this sucks. Luckily I just recovered a tar from the homebrew cache with the source code. Lets hope someone will create a creative-commons-dl or something soon.

Reply


@pdimitar 1 year

Replying to @phantop 🎙

I feared this day for a long time. Yet I am still disappointed that it had come.

I wonder if the project can defend itself?

Reply


@maxo133 1 year

Replying to @phantop 🎙

Isn't DMCA working the way that if you disagree with dmca takedown and fill certain form, the side asking to take down content (RIAA) needs to get court order?

That's the way how it works with google search.

Reply


@RealStickman_ 1 year

Replying to @phantop 🎙

Made a torrent of the latest version from pypi. Hope it works. magnet:?xt=urn:btih:da76788b4d05583f8a3a7ed60f136c5647daa113&dn=youtube%5Fdl-2020.9.20.tar.gz&tr=http%3A%2F%2Ftracker.bittorrent.am%2Fannounce&tr=http%3A%2F%2Fopen.acgtracker.com%3A1096%2Fannounce&tr=http%3A%2F%2Fretracker.krs-ix.ru%2Fannounce&tr=udp%3A%2F%2F9.rarbg.com%3A2710%2Fannounce

Edit: NVM. Getting nowhere with setting that up.

Reply


@tgbugs 1 year

Replying to @phantop 🎙

This should serve as an example to people who want (for example) the GNU project to relax their contributor copyright assignment practices. It only takes a single moment of complacency and the vultures will swoop in. In this case it was because of sloppiness around which urls were used in a demo. Yeah, all urls are the same to the guy who is building a url slurping service (which is why the take down will likely be defeated), but there is an entire profession dedicated to nothing but nit picking, loophole hunting, and general levels of pedantry that we have just come to call it lawyering. Layers are like cliffs or handguns. Stay as far away from them as possible, they are facts of life, but you really don't want to have anything to do with them unless you have no other option.

Reply


@lousken 1 year

Replying to @phantop 🎙

anyone hosting mirror?

Reply


@codecamper 1 year

Replying to @phantop 🎙

gitlab ftw

Reply


@med_abidi 1 year

Replying to @phantop 🎙

This is shit!

Reply


@daodedickinson 1 year

Replying to @phantop 🎙

This is just the next terrifying development on Planet China. YouTube-dl went unmolested for years. About week ago, I was party to an online conversation a week ago about how youtube-dl is an important tool for archiving videos of public officials before they can be disappeared.

Coincidence?

After the RIAA won a case against Limewire in 2010, the next significant legal action I can find in a bit of looking is that the US Supreme Court ruled against the RIAA in Allen v. Cooper (March 23, 2020).

Here are the opinions: https://www.law.cornell.edu/supremecourt/text/18-877#writing...

I have a lot to look into...

Reply


@trhway 1 year

Replying to @phantop 🎙

can RIAA be hit back? - to me it looks like the RIAA actions to take down software intimidate the authors of the software and obstructs the authors from exercising and enjoying of the copyright of their software.

Reply


@dredmorbius 1 year

Replying to @phantop 🎙

The more I look at the RIAA's complaint, the stranger it seems.

I'm not even sure that the RIAA has standing to sue or could demonstrate injury:

- The claimed anti-circ method is not the RIAA's, it is Google's (via YouTube). - As a user agent, youtube-dl is simple an alternate Web access method which runs code from the YouTube website as a necessary part of the process of accessing and playing content ... meant to be accessed and downloaded. - Youtube-dl has substantial non-infringing use. 17 USC 1201(a)(2)(B) https://www.law.cornell.edu/uscode/text/17/1201

See 17 USC 1203: Civil remedies: https://www.law.cornell.edu/uscode/text/17/1203

Reply


@riclad 1 year

Replying to @phantop 🎙

Courts have ruled betamax Vcrs were legal, its legal to record tv shows and movies to watch them at a later date. Even though in theory Vcrs could be used for the purposes of piracy. Just because a device might be used to pirate content does not mean its can be banned. Like bittorrent is used by many non profits to distribute Open source software like Linux distro iso, s

Reply


@aestetix 1 year

Replying to @phantop 🎙

https://www.cryptocats.me is now uploading the source code of youtube-dl to the gpg keyservers.

Reply


@cblconfederate 1 year

Replying to @phantop 🎙

There is a lot of CC0 content on youtube that exists so you can download it, like stock video, sounds, background videos etc. How are we going to dowload those now?

Also couldn't the youtub-dl team claim that the whole "drm video download test" was a security test?

Reply


@intricatedetail 1 year

Replying to @phantop 🎙

RIAA should take example from hip hop artists. Instead of worrying about people copying their songs they just talk over the entire piece

Reply


@kazinator 1 year

Replying to @phantop 🎙

Can someone PM me the location of a repo that still has this up somewhere? I might be able to clone it and host it.

Reply


@dr_dshiv 1 year

Replying to @phantop 🎙

I remember during the Napster days dressing up as an RIAA agent for Halloween, with combat gear and a blowtorch to burn CDs

Reply


@openfuture 1 year

Replying to @phantop 🎙

It would be interesting to see who added the testcase that has the copyrighted video. Maybe honest mistake, maybe it was intentional to kill the project.

Reply


@brink 1 year

Replying to @phantop 🗣

Is there a decentralized version control system solution out there to host projects like this?

Reply


@richardARPANET 1 year

Replying to @phantop 🎙

Very pathetic that Github took this repository down. I was about to move our company code over to Github from self hosted Gitlab, this move has put the a the brakes on that.

Reply


@VikingCoder 1 year

Replying to @phantop 🎙

I frequently use YouTube-dl, and have never once used it to download music videos and sound recordings owned by member companies of the RIAA.

Reply


@mikece 1 year

Replying to @phantop 🎙

This is like issuing a DMCA takedown on Microsoft Word because it's possible to use it as a means to defame someone.

Reply


@amatecha 1 year

Replying to @phantop 🎙

Web browsers download the video too. Take down web browsers! Heck, outlaw operating systems! Hard drives are infringing on our right to profit!

... Actually, I should stop giving them ideas for their next takedown notices...

Reply


@hubbabubbarex 1 year

Replying to @phantop 🎙

Youtube you suck! You spy cheat and lie... Sell privacy of users to 3rd party.. Just like buggy Facebook.

Reply


@mola 1 year

Replying to @phantop 🎙

Shameful

Reply


@johnisgood 1 year

Replying to @phantop 🎙

This is going to be difficult to find the authors' comments if there are any. I am still curious where will the development continue because downloading from YouTube often breaks and requires some fixing, i.e. update youtube-dl and it works! :/

Reply


@psds2 1 year

Replying to @phantop 🎙

Tldr all these comments - youtube dl got in trouble because they link to copyrighted material in the readme which from a legal perspective shows intent to circumvent copyright. If they had just linked to videos they had uploaded themselves as examples everything would be fine.

Reply


@arafsheikh 1 year

Replying to @phantop 🎙

Here’s the source code encoded as two images: https://twitter.com/galacticfurball/status/13197659867911577...

Reply


@hprotagonist 1 year

Replying to @phantop 🗣

https://archive.org/details/github.com-ytdl-org-youtube-dl_-...

if nothing else, today i finally actually used a bundle file:

  git clone ytdl-org-youtube-dl_-_2020-09-28_19-41-32.bundle youtube-dl

Reply


@fivre 1 year

Replying to @phantop 🎙

Is there any legislative or regulatory work that is trying to address the gigantic mess that is music (or media in general) copyright and licensing in the US?

The DMCA is over 2 decades old, and seemingly nothing useful has come up since. The current system seems to do not much other than provide a big stick for the RIAA and MPAA to wield whenever they get bored and try to extract rent using law that still seems stuck in some mire of player piano era logic. The last sane system I encountered was when I was doing college radio, where you had a license to play music, were required to log what music you played, and were assured that some clearinghouse would sort out the royalties that needed paying out of the aggregate license fees.

There seems to be mass confusion over what's legal on modern services like Twitch, where music is used in the same spirit as radio (background music chosen at the whim of the DJ/streamer), but isn't legal because it runs up against licensing schemes designed for including music in TV and film productions with massive budgets.

There doesn't seem to be any clear way to handle shit as any sort of small content creator, as the rightsholders seem to want to preserve some weird fantasy land where they're both entitled to complex negotiated rights deals (which make sense if you're say, some massive entity a la NBC, and want to include music in a new big budget show) while also not providing anything for the rest of society (if you're not NBC- or CBS-sized, the people who negotiate rights contracts won't give you the time of day). If you're not one of the mammoth-class media conglomerates, your options appear to be "do not use music ever" or "use music casually, and then be on the receiving end of a massive legal bludgeon". You can't get the time (or music) of day, but if you do somehow manage to get it, then you _do_ get the time of day, but in the form of massive retroactive fees or whatever that you "should" have paid had the licensing cthulu been willing to engage with you before you determined that the rightsholders weren't interested in dealing with you.

Right ol' kafkaesque nightmare, it is.

Reply


@austincheney 1 year

Replying to @phantop 🎙

Strange that email made it through. I delete any email in my inbox that begins with: Dear Sir or Madam as it looks like spam.

Reply


@Havoc 1 year

Replying to @phantop 🎙

Better take down wget too just to be sure

Reply


@int_10h 1 year

Replying to @phantop 🎙

I'm not saying anything but there's a gitlab source clone of this on debian's repo :) https://salsa.debian.org/debian/youtube-dl

Reply


@cute_boi 1 year

Replying to @phantop 🎙

Even Meme will be DMCAed in future. Future is dark :(

Reply


@lelandbatey 1 year

Replying to @phantop 🎙

The actual content of the legal argument being made by the RIAA in this and associated documents is lying by omission at best, and arguably is straight up perjury.

The only _concrete_ circumvention they level at youtube-dl is that it "circumvents YouTube’s rolling cipher". I looked into this more, and before I go into how totally bulshit it is that they've apparently conned judges into believing this, you should read their full accusation (or just read the full DMCA letter from the RIAA):

    For further context, please see the attached court decision from the Hamburg
    Regional Court that describes the technological measure at issue (known as
    YouTube’s “rolling cipher”), and the court’s determination that the technology
    employed by YouTube is an effective technical measure within the meaning of EU

    1 See https://github.com/ytdl-org/youtube-dl/blob/master/README.md#readme.

    and German law, which is materially identical to Title 17 U.S.C. §1201 of the
    United States Code. The court further determined that the service at issue in
    that case unlawfully circumvented YouTube’s rolling cipher technical
    protection measure.2 The youtube-dl source code functions in a manner
    essentially identical to the service at issue in the Hamburg Regional Court
    decision. As there, the youtube-dl source code available on Github (which is
    the subject of this notice) circumvents YouTube’s rolling cipher to gain
    unauthorized access to copyrighted audio files, in violation of YouTube’s
    express terms of service,3 and in plain violation of Section 1201 of the
    Digital Millennium Copyright Act, 17 U.S.C. §1201.
So that's what the RIAA is saying that youtube-dl is doing. However, they're referencing a document that I _presume_ was attached to their original email, the document from the Hamburg Regional Court, but we don't have that email, as Github didn't publish that document for us to see.

So I went looking, and it turns out that the RIAA has used this exact same excuse to go after some other people, their documents are available, and we can see more of what they wrote. I'm referencing this[1] document which I found through this[0] blog post about a 2016 case where the RIAA went after an online service called TYMP3. Here are the links, and here's what the RIAA said:

[0] - https://www.techdirt.com/articles/20160927/17062135646/can-s...

[1] - https://assets.documentcloud.org/documents/3114545/YTMP3-Com...

    < The following is found on page 8 of the PDF linked above >
    39. Plaintiffs are informed and believe, and on that basis allege as follows:
    YouTube has adopted and implemented technological measures to control access to
    content maintained on its site and to prevent or inhibit downloading, copying,
    or illicit distribution of that content.  YouTube maintains two separate URLs
    for any given video file: one URL, which is visible to the user, is for the
    webpage where the video playback occurs, and one URL, which is not visible to
    the user, is for the video file itself.  The second URL is generated using a
    complex (and periodically changing) algorithm - known as a “rolling cipher” -
    that is intended to inhibit direct access to the underlying YouTube video
    files, thereby preventing or inhibiting the downloading, copying, or
    distribution of the video files.

    < further down, on page 12, they lay out their accusation >
    Among other things, Plaintiffs are informed and believe, and on that basis
    allege, that YTMP3 employs a means to circumvent the YouTube rolling cipher
    technology described above, and other technological means that YouTube employs
    to protect content on its site.
So, let's go see what the Youtube-dl source code actually is doing. The tl;dr version is that youtube does some slight rearranging of the characters in the URL of the remote resource, but they also supply you with the JS code to un-arrange that code into the actual working "signature" which you can use to request the video from youtube. So youtube-dl downloads the rearranged URL, and the JS that youtube provides, and uses a Python implementation of the JS interpreter to run YOUTUBE'S OWN JS THAT YOUTUBE SENT US IN CLEARTEXT TO FIGURE OUT HOW TO DOWNLOAD THE VIDEO. See the source code (hosted on gitlab for now, hopefully that stays up):

https://gitlab.com/HacktorIT/youtube-dl/-/blob/master/youtub...

So to summarize, youtube creates two URLs: one that's a public video URL, and one that's the URL to the actual video content. The URL to the video content changes on a rolling basis, and is slightly rearranged. All that's true. However, what the RIAA is avoiding saying, and which completely changes the context of this discussion is:

YOUTUBE SENDS YOU BOTH URLS IN CLEARTEXT, AND INCLUDES THE CODE FOR HOW TO DOWNLOAD THE VIDEO, SO YOU AND YOUR WEB BROWSER CAN DOWNLOAD THE VIDEOS WITHOUT USING ANY ENCRYPTION/DECODING.

So when a judge asks "how is it that you're getting around this 'rolling cipher' to access the video?" all you have to say is "Youtube told me where to download the video, so I followed Youtube's instructions and downloaded it from the URL that Youtube gave me."

Frankly, I'm amazed that any judge, or any lawyer, would ever lay out or believe such bare faced lies as is being spouted by the RIAA in this document.

FUCK THE RIAA

Reply


@ineedasername 1 year

Replying to @phantop 🎙

Even if the examples in the source code point to the code as deliberately enabling copyright infringement, I thought the DMCA takedown process was for actual copywritten content. Even if they are found, in a napster-like way, to be "illegal", it doesn't seem like a DMCA takedown notice is a valid mechanism to enforce the law here.

Reply


@dpumpshitlord 1 year

Replying to @phantop 🎙

Let them pay to take you to court—

Reply


@xtat 1 year

Replying to @phantop 🎙

How is the RIAA still a thing? They came after me in the early 00s for running an indie napster server https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/OpenNap

Reply


@URfejk 1 year

Replying to @phantop 🎙

Already at number 4 on all-time list: http://www.hntoplinks.com/all

Reply


@White_Wolf 1 year

Replying to @phantop 🎙

It's still up on gitee

Warning: do a diff against the last archive.org copy to make sure it's clean.

Reply


@lsiebert 1 year

Replying to @phantop 🎙

I just installed it from archive.org using the url homebrew uses. It's a simple matter to run brew install -d youtube-dl plug the url that into archive.org, download the archive, cp it to the dl location (minus the .incomplete) that brew expects, and then run it again without the -d so it thinks it is already downloaded.

I wouldn't have installed if they hadn't done this, and I'll probably never use it, but this rubbed me the wrong way.

Reply


@pengaru 1 year

Replying to @phantop 🎙

Considering youtube-dl isn't doing anything a web browser accessing these sites can't do, essentially serving as a headless web browser with a convenient CLI, I don't see how this could possibly have a leg to stand on.

It's like serving Mozilla a DMCA takedown for FireFox.

I however welcome the highly visible reminder that github should only be used as a mirror at most.

Reply


@theobr 1 year

Replying to @phantop 🎙

This is a really sad moment for open source, especially for content creators and devs in media/content spaces. I've shipped youtube-dl for a user-facing (production) experience before. This sucks.

Reply


@AkumaNoTsubasa 1 year

Replying to @phantop 🎙

>Note that RIAA is making this takedown because the software CAN be used to download copyrighted music and videos

Well, then please also Block all Browsers, SSH, Tunnel, etc. too, because you can use those too to easily download copyrighted material.

Reply


@skottk 1 year

Replying to @phantop 🎙

Not a lawyer, software guy working in licensing & copyright for 20+ years. Was paid for a few years to talk about this stuff with tech and publishing people.

They're requesting the takedown under 17 U.S. Code § 1201 - Circumvention of copyright protection systems. [https://www.law.cornell.edu/uscode/text/17/1201] It's a few paragraphs of the actual law at stake here. There's no much to it.

Essentially, they're arguing that Youtube's normal stream distribution technology is "effectively control[ling] access to a work." Given 3A & B from the link above, that will take a fair amount of arguing - there's no encryption, there's nothing that requires information under the authority of the copyright holder (like a key) to descramble the information.

Unless the repo has code that's breaking browser-based DRM, in which all bets are off - breaking DRM is by definition circumventing a technical protection. Doesn't matter if it was easy to break-- you break encryption, there's no more argument over whether you're circumventing. Decryption is right there in the text of the law.

Github agreed to the takedown because they don't want to be distributing a circumvention tool, and they don't feel like going to court over whether this is a circumvention tool or not. There are a lot of repos out there, you can't go to court over every single one. I'd be surprised if it stayed up on GitLab for much more than a New York minute, either.

The EFF might fight this, because there's a pretty good argument around the noninfringing uses; however, they also might not, because there's not much of an argument around whether it violates the Google Terms.

Some us are mentioning that there are use cases for this software that don't infringe copyright. That goes back to Sony v Universal, the VCR/Betamax case, which permitted the production and sale of technologies with "substantial noninfringing uses." In the case of the VCR, the particular noninfringing use was time-shifting of broadcast television, taping shows to watch later. The noninfringing uses here are around downloading works that are in the public domain or Creative Commons, and definitely around offline use. Easily a colorable argument.

The file sharing cases of the early 2000's have drawn some lines around the noninfringing use defense, though. Napster and Grokster both claimed, in court, to support noninfringing uses. However, both products promoted their products as offering free access to copyright-protected works, and the courts took notice of that in both cases-- I believe that the Grokster opinion may have noted that Grokster had never mentioned a noninfringing use outside the trial.

IOW, if you're providing a dual-use technology for noninfringing use that is also capable of infringing use, you absolutely cannot promote the infringing uses to the exclusion of others. Not only do you draw unwanted attention to yourself, you may actually (as in Napster and Grokster) invalidate the most important defense that you have for your activities.

Reply


@dylan604 1 year

Replying to @phantop 🎙

hold on... brew update && brew upgrade

phew. i'm all good.

Reply


@olliej 1 year

Replying to @phantop 🎙

They literally recommended downloading copyrighted material, which seems like a beacon of "this is primarily for copyright infringement"

Reply


@bergstromm466 1 year

Replying to @phantop 🎙

I’m so glad that Github is owned by Microsoft and that they don’t immediately comply with the takedown... /sarcasm

Reply


@mugivarra69 1 year

Replying to @phantop 🎙

time to move to gitlab.

Reply


@kelvin0 1 year

Replying to @phantop 🎙

You could use your rifle/pistol/firearm to shoot unlawful transpasser, but since it's also able to shoot down innocent children in our neighborhood, please cease and desist.

Reply


@doompilot 1 year

Replying to @phantop 🎙

Anybody has a fork on the dark web we can all start using? (tor, i2p, whatever)

Reply


@dpumpshitlord 1 year

Replying to @phantop 🎙

Music industry died when distribution changed, just die already

Reply


@jijji 1 year

Replying to @phantop 🎙

why would youtube-dl reference copyrighted material as examples in their documentation/website.... doh!

Reply


@SteveNuts 1 year

Replying to @phantop 🎙

Youtube itself should be taken down because it may be used to upload copyrighted content

Reply


@musicbizsucks 1 year

Replying to @phantop 🎙

I doubt there will be many pro-RIAA perspectives here so as someone familiar with their leadership and goals, I might as well add some perspective.

Imagine yourself stumbling upon some incredible technology breakthrough. Let's say, it's some magical script you wrote that automatically improves the efficiency of any container by 70%+. You've worked for years on this specific problem, went broke a couple of times trying to figure it out, and finally struck gold. You form a company, issue that IP to the company, and start getting rich.

Then one day, literally Google comes along and posts your script to some website they own, without your permission. They did this illegally, without your permission, by using this other neat script called gofyourself-dl. You have a problem now. Every is improving their containers or whatever for free. Your company loses revenue every day because why would anyone pay you for tech they can get for free from Google?

What can you do? Sue Google? Good luck with that! No, you would complain to a regulator, which is the only real power (sort of) against that kind of money. You would try and convince that regulator to stop Google from stealing your IP and getting rich from it because it is YOUR IP and YOU should get rich from it. In the meantime, since gofyourself-dl is the way people are stealing your IP, you naturally try to get that taken down because IT IS BEING USED TO STEAL YOUR IP.

Stealing IP is exactly what YouTube is - and has been - doing, for years. There is this weird idea that the major record labels (who fund the RIAA) have unlimited money and are just as evil as blah blah blah, in reality the entire music economy is a minuscule fraction of Google's market cap, power, size, influence, everything, and large tech companies have no real incentive to deal with them in the standard cases because why would an elephant concern itself with an ant.

It sucks to do this to an open source repo, but everything they are saying in this memo is true - this technology is obviously being used to STEAL IP. Its primary focus is the THEFT OF IP. DMCA is a shitty blunt instrument that no one likes, don't for a second think the RIAA is thrilled with that mechanism, but what else are they supposed to do? What would you do if it was someone stealing your proprietary code and posting everywhere after having stolen it from you?

Reply


@t0mmyb0y 1 year

Replying to @phantop 🎙

Counter sue for a bunch of money for wasting your time.

Reply


@fandroid 1 year

Replying to @phantop 🎙

As it turns out, a few days ago, I was reminiscing with an old school DJ about sample-based music production. My argument was that all one needs is a DAW and youtube-dl. It seems that the timing of my argument was rather inauspicious.

Reply


@diffeomorphism 1 year

Replying to @phantop 🎙

Is there an alternative to github that is resistant to denial of service attacks^1 like this?

1: At this time this is just a baseless accusation and there are no repercussions to the RIAA for blatant abuse. Why wouldn't they simply send a takedown for anything they don't like no matter whether it is legal or not?

Reply


@pseudosavant 1 year

Replying to @phantop 🎙

There are multiple extensions in Google's own Android Chrome stores for downloading videos from YouTube and everyone else. I just used a few to download and HLS stream that was having severe buffering issues.

It would seem hard to argue that Google is completely against it when they could be considered a contributor to the "problem". Providing apps that violate their own TOS. Not just source code, but actual apps/extensions.

Reply


@hkt 1 year

Replying to @phantop 🎙

Maybe it is time to host the project outside of the US?

Reply


@eshack94 1 year

Replying to @phantop 🎙

Even if youtube-dl doesn't get re-hosted on GitHub, is it likely that it will show up again on another site such as GitLab or a self-hosted repo by the maintainer?

Reply


@weetniet 1 year

Replying to @phantop 🎙

This is a heavy blow for the community, regardless of where forks show up.

Reply


@iamnot_fussy 1 year

Replying to @phantop 🎙

Have we heard anything from the youtube-dl developers yet? Have they made some sort of statement? Are they really going to get sued? Is it possible to support them (other than through the EFF: https://eff.org/donate/)?

Has github made a statement yet?

(Oh and don't think for one moment that the RIAA's actions have anything to do with supporting the struggling artist.)

Reply


@ravenstine 1 year

Replying to @phantop 🎙

This is lousy! I depend on youtube-dl to archive videos for later use. Nothing MAFIAA would be interested in; just stuff from topical channels that I want to have around for personal use in case they get deleted.

I really hope this doesn't stand, because what it's basically saying is that you can't even tell someone how to download something that might be copyrighted. Not only that, but this was brought forth by a murky technicality.

Pray to god this never happens to NewPipe.

Reply


@nolim1t 1 year

Replying to @phantop 🎙



@jordigh 1 year

Replying to @phantop 🎙

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, my ability to partake in culture will be severely limited.

Reply


@gobogobohey 1 year

Replying to @phantop 🎙

I'm a lurker, made this account just to say this:

I am not using NewPipe or youtube-dl or other tools like them to by-pass the DRM/whatever the fuck you call this shit on "content" from RIAA/SuckADICKIA etc, because, let's be honest, it's garbage. Yeah, there you go, I said it, hate me if you want but be honest, it's just fucking garbage. On and on and on with shitty super-hero movies, that fucking tribal dance music with some skimpy women twerking their asses, hip-hop from mega-rich "stars" barely able to connect two words together but seemingly able to sing a whole tear-jerker about how bad they have it, yeah, all of that and more, GARBAGE.

no. I download original content which Youtube and the rest of the American leeches, like Facebook, Twitter, Instagram and on and on pray upon to make their money cause let's face it, that's about the only thing these American companies are good at doing. Making money. Not generating original content, not original ideas, heck, most of the shit they use nowadays are stuff they stole when they pushed other companies off the market and bought them for nothing. But I digress.

I download them just because of retards like you RIAA, and like you Google/Youtube. Remember when you were threatening to ban hacking content because you don't like the fact that knowledge is the great equalizer and then you went "ha ha we were kidding"? Ha, ha fuck you, we have retroshares and full i2P archives of those videos now, thanks to you, so go fuck yourselves, yeah?

I still watch them on youtube, not because I care about you fucking leeches, but to give some pennies to the poor fucks which create the content you leech on like the fucking cancer you people and your corporations are, but if you ever decide to take videos down I will have a backup and there's nothing you can do, so again:

fuck riaa, fuck youtoube and facebook and hollywood and twerking garbage and pretty much 99% that comes nowadays from the country of the fat entitled boomers.

Thank you American original content creators, software creators, scientists, engineers, EFF and everyone else that is trying to make the world a better place in spite of these worms.

Reply


@rla3rd 1 year

Replying to @phantop 🎙

and yet the code is still in pypi for any developer to use...

Reply


@dredmorbius 1 year

Replying to @phantop 🎙

This isn't a DMCA takedown. It's a cease and desist letter citing the DMCA.

The difference matters. GitHub is required to honor DMCA takedowns. Other legal requests are granted on a case by case basis.

-- /u/telionn @ reddit

https://old.reddit.com/r/programming/comments/jgub36/youtube...

As I understand, takedown is a 17 USC 512 (copyright infringement) safe-harbour, but not a required or indemnifying protection under 17 USC 1201, anti-circumvention:

https://www.law.cornell.edu/uscode/text/17/1201

Lumen (Chilling Effects) is silent on this point in their FAQ: https://lumendatabase.org/topics/14

Reply


@sushshshsh 1 year

Replying to @phantop 🎙

I can also use OBS or a Google Pixel to capture material from youtube but I don't see anyone going after them

Reply


@htrap 1 year

Replying to @phantop 🎙

Saw this coming. We are working on https://dgit.sh for the last couple of months. Dgit is a decentralized code collaboration platform where we harness the power of git for versioning and arweave blockchain for permanent data storage. We also have a Dgit community on https://community.xyz where the stakeholders take all decisions transparently via a vote. Dgit will be available for use after its launch on 2nd November. If you are interested in what we are doing feel free to join our discord and chat with us https://bit.ly/dgitchat

Reply


@fabiomaia 1 year

Replying to @phantop 🎙

Wow even release downloads were taken down

  $ brew install youtube-dl
  ...
  ==> Downloading https://github.com/ytdl-org/youtube-dl/releases/download/2020.09.20/youtube-dl-2020.09.20.tar.gz
  ...
  curl: (22) The requested URL returned error: 451 Unavailable for Legal Reasons
  Error: Failed to download resource "youtube-dl"
  Download failed: https://github.com/ytdl-org/youtube-dl/releases/download/2020.09.20/youtube-dl-2020.09.20.tar.gz

Reply


@dvt 1 year

Replying to @phantop 🗣

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
    Receiving objects: 100% (98560/98560), 49.86 MiB | 9.58 MiB/s, done.
    Resolving deltas: 100% (73037/73037), done.

Reply


@Paianni 1 year

Replying to @phantop 🎙

Unless the RIAA is actually going to take the owner of youtube-dl's domain to court, there's nothing (for now) stopping yt-dl from setting up another development platform of some sort. DMCA takedowns are cause for concern but they're not quite the be all and end all of a dispute.

Reply


@hexo 1 year

Replying to @phantop 🎙

As we can see again having github as a sole distribution mechanism was a bad idea. I hope they have backups and will be back online soon.

Reply


@ddingus 1 year

Replying to @phantop 🎙

Seems to me this is leading to contested cases that can be routed to a more corporatist friendly Supreme Court.

Reply


@Aeolun 1 year

Replying to @phantop 🎙

Also note that forking a repository on github is not enough to make it your code.

All the connected forks have also been disabled. Better to clone and re-push if you ask me.

Reply


@JdeBP 1 year

Replying to @phantop 🎙

RealPlayer next?

"Download Web Videos" "Keep your favorite web videos safe on your PC by downloading them. You can save videos from popular sites in one click – including YouTube."

* https://www.real.com/uk/realplayer

Reply


@Kenji 1 year

Replying to @phantop 🎙

This is an example of why you shouldn't use a bug tracker that does not store its data on machines you control.

Reply


@porjo 1 year

Replying to @phantop 🎙

I guess it was only a matter of time, the more popular it became. I have Youtube Premium and still use this utility every day for legitimate reasons (converting talk videos to audio file that I can listen to offline). Sad day for youtube-dl but I expect there will be many contenders to fill the void.

Reply


@tbabej 1 year

Replying to @phantop 🎙

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 comply with the Apache 2.0 Licence [1].

[1] https://github.com/github/dmca/blob/master/2020/10/2020-10-2...

Reply


@anovikov 1 year

Replying to @phantop 🎙

Super surprising that software like this could exist in the legal space and with known creators. I mean, it's obviously a pirating app, it makes every effort to circumvent download protection right?

Reply


@names_are_hard 1 year

Replying to @phantop 🎙

Some time in the last few hours the devs have updated their site (https://youtube-dl.org/) with a notice about the takedown and removed the broken github links. You can now download the latest executables again. I'm looking forward to seeing their new home.

Reply


@rektide 1 year

Replying to @phantop 🎙

How quickly does Microsoft usually HTTP Response Code 451 (#rfc77525 [1]) sites that get DMCA notices?

They acted very fast on this one.

[1] https://tools.ietf.org/html/rfc7725

Reply


@ijcd 1 year

Replying to @phantop 🎙

The extractors directory had 765 extractors in it, only one of which is YouTube. The facts seem cherry-picked to support their case (well duh). Hopefully that will matter. Given that youtube is a tenth of a percent of the extractors maybe there's hope.

FWIW, it's easy to find the code on Google. The release tarballs have the format youtube-dl-YYYY.MM.DD.tar.gz and one can look in the Homebrew Cellar, for example and see there was a release on 2020.09.20. ;)

Reply


@TLightful 1 year

Replying to @phantop 🎙

I'll download what I want, when I want.

Reply


@laplacedemon 1 year

Replying to @phantop 🎙

This makes me want to stop using GitHub. I especially feel bad because I have a paid GitHub account, and I don't like the idea about my money sponsoring censorship activities like this one. I wonder what a good alternative would be?.. Bitbucket perhaps?

Reply


@zxcvbn4038 1 year

Replying to @phantop 🎙

This should be about impossible to enforce? Every developer and everyone who has ever cloned the repo has the complete source tree with commits. I can think of a list of countries where United States laws are not a concern, I imagine that shortly this will be one of the most distributed repositories ever.

It also shows again that while free services like Github are convenient, and truthfully their interface is the one to beat, it is better to use them as a mirror of something you self host then the primary.

Some options: (I prefer gitea - easiest to install and maintain, very active development community, single binary, written in Go)

https://gitea.com/

https://gogs.io/

https://about.gitlab.com/install/

https://git-scm.com/book/en/v2/Git-on-the-Server-GitWeb

Reply


@kemonocode 1 year

Replying to @phantop 🎙

I'd think the RIAA and Google are well acquainted with the Streisand effect by now... I'm just hoping the takedown will prompt a whole bunch of people to contribute to youtube-dl out of spite, as I know it had been lagging behind due to simply not having enough contributors. I'd even go ahead and throw down the glove.

Reply


@koyao 1 year

Replying to @phantop 🎙

Where can I clone the youtube-dl repo, err.. for educational purposes?

Reply


@CivBase 1 year

Replying to @phantop 🎙

> this seems outrageous the same way DMCA'ing a Bittorrent client would be

Why stop there? I can use my browser to illegally download content, so I guess we better issue a DMCA takedown that too. But who even needs a browser? Let's issue a takedown for the GNU Project while we're at it because I could use wget to do the same thing. In fact, I could write my own program to illegally download content, so we better just get rid of computers altogether.

Stop attacking useful tools just because they can be used to do bad things! Youtube-dl should obviously change their README to get rid of the copyright-infringing example, but this DMCA takedown is otherwise rotten from the core.

Reply


@blitblitblit 1 year

Replying to @phantop 🎙

Time to revive GitTorrent? https://github.com/cjb/GitTorrent

Reply


@LockAndLol 1 year

Replying to @phantop 🎙

Radicle[1] can't come soon enough. Git already works over I2P[2] (TOR alternative) btw ;)

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/

[2]: https://geti2p.net/en/docs/applications/git

Reply


@nimbius 1 year

Replying to @phantop 🎙

Most of the comments so far are ignoring the bigger picture: this isnt something new, its just the RIAA playing whack-a-mole with the DMCA hammer. Theyve been doing it for 20 years, and in those 20 years the most they have managed to accomplish is building a better, more resilient mole.

Napster was followed by bittorrent, bittorrent by popcorntime, and youtube-dl. in the past 20 years the industry has quietly capitulated and delivered some content users really want like streaming audio services, but in the grande cosmos of the DMCA-related war on piracy the industry itself continues to do more to smite its own face than it does to offer a more reasonable and accessible product to their audience.

There is nothing to keep me from writing something now that scrapes puseaudio for content triggered by mpv. the only real factor thats of concern is that this new backflip would be even harder for the RIAA to prosecute.

Reply


@blumomo 1 year

Replying to @phantop 🎙

Many (thousands, if not tens of thousands) YouTube videos are being deleted right now, crazy censorship taking place. If tools like those get banned then it gets harder to keep copies of videos before they will be banned from YouTube.

Reply


@camnora 1 year

Replying to @phantop 🎙

How about we serve the DMCA to the original media source. Attacking the tools does not make any sense. Which tool is going to be next?

Reply


@johnnyapol 1 year

Replying to @phantop 🎙



@ezoe 1 year

Replying to @phantop 🎙

So, according to the RIAA's claim, it's

> (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.

https://github.com/github/dmca/blob/master/2020/10/2020-10-2...

(i) is strange claim as youtube-dl simply implements various streaming protocols public to anyone, most commonly used protocol is HLS which is just a simple list of URIs of small portion of video files in text file over HTTP/HTTPS. No technological protection whatsoever. (ii) can be easily avoided by simply removing or changing the example usage.

Reply


@bob1029 1 year

Replying to @phantop 🎙

Assuming youtube-dl is dead and the web APIs become hopelessly obfuscated, how hard would it be to talk to youtube as if I were a samsung smart tv?

Perhaps the next iteration of this project can leverage google's own insatiable greed against them. Embedding youtube into every "smart" device on the face of the planet probably requires that google maintain a fairly consistent private API which all of these devices can communicate with. If someone were to reverse engineer one of these devices or just throw wireshark on the WLAN, it probably wouldn't take long to emulate the same approach...

What is stopping someone from using these types of internal interfaces instead of the public ones?

Reply


@jedberg 1 year

Replying to @phantop 🎙

I'm not sure with the RIAA hopes to accomplish here.

I suspect this will be fixed in a day, and just be hosted elsewhere.

And also, isn't this like when the studios sued the makers of VCRs?

Reply


@ordo_inf 1 year

Replying to @phantop 🎙

Everybody, go to PyPi: https://pypi.org/project/youtube_dl/#files Download the whl. Download the tar.gz. ???? Profit.

Also, a recommendation for the youtube_dl crew is to use a self-hosted solution (if GitHub/GitLab/SourceForge wont do). Find a cheap Linux hosting provider and run Gitea on it: https://github.com/go-gitea/gitea

It's the best tips I can give for now.

Reply


@bArray 1 year

Replying to @phantop 🎙

I would like to add to the discussion that there are many perfectly legal uses of YoutubeDL:

* 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`

Reply


@Dahoon 1 year

Replying to @phantop 🎙

Yet another reason you should host outside the US no matter the legality.

Reply


@dredmorbius 1 year

Replying to @phantop 🎙

ZDNet reports this is part of a larger action:

"RIAA blitz takes down 18 GitHub projects used for downloading YouTube videos"

aand isn't a DMCA 512 takedown:

Although GitHub classified the RIAA letter as a DMCA takedown request, it is not one. As Public Knowledge Legal Director John Bergmayer pointed out today on Twitter, RIAA isn't alleging the library infringed on its rights, but that the library is illegal in itself.

This isn’t really a DMCA request. I don’t see an assertion that youtube-dl is an infringing work. Rather the claim is that it’s illegal per se https://t.co/vQ16nVleCf

— John Bergmayer (@bergmayer) October 23, 2020

https://www.zdnet.com/article/riaa-blitz-takes-down-18-githu...

Reply


@amelius 1 year

Replying to @phantop 🎙

I used YouTube-dl to watch videos, not to download and store them.

Are user-agents illegal now?

Reply


@avodonosov 1 year

Replying to @phantop 🎙

What is the simplest way to store source code repos in some decentralized file system? Like store git repo in IPFS folder, would others be able to clone it and submit pull requests?

Reply


@panpanna 1 year

Replying to @phantop 🎙

We need a rouge git server.

Like silk road but for your open source fixes...

Reply


@proffan 1 year

Replying to @phantop 🎙

Maybe someone send an email to https://github.com/jessephus to get more information?

Reply


@Iv 1 year

Replying to @phantop 🎙

Delenda RIAA

The whole copyright industry is based on toxic premises that do not hold true anymore in the internet age.

By now, different models have been proven to work. Make them the norm. Abolish copyright. Or turn them back into what they were supposed to be: a TEMPORARY protection of a work since first publication (originally 21 years IIRC).

Old Disney characters, superheroes invented in the 40s and 50s, even the "more recent" Starwars are part of culture now just like Othello or Moby Dick are. Allow to use them as such.

Reply


@resfirestar 1 year

Replying to @phantop 🎙

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 cases or something in the repo, or if they’re correct that youtube-dl bypasses DRM in violation of a different part of the DMCA, it’s still not a valid takedown because GitHub isn’t hosting anything the RIAA/those it represents own the copyright to. The correct way to do this is to go after the lead youtube-dl developer(s) and/or GitHub for facilitating infringement or whatever, but I don’t think RIAA wants to do that because they probably don’t have much/any legitimate grounds for legal claims against them, so they abuse the DMCA to look like they’re doing something.

Edit: for a more concrete picture of what happens next, read GitHub’s DMCA policy.[2] Basically youtube-dl can file a counter notice assuming they disagree with the claims, after that the RIAA has 10-14 days to get a court order or the repo goes back up.

[1] https://torrentfreak.com/github-reinstates-popcorn-time-code...

[2] https://docs.github.com/en/free-pro-team@latest/github/site-...

Reply


@7ewis 1 year

Replying to @phantop 🎙

Someone uploaded the source to Twitter inside an image:

https://twitter.com/GalacticFurball/status/13197659867911577...

Reply


@google234123 1 year

Replying to @phantop 🎙

This tool literally recommendeds downloading copyrighted material. This is a good take down.

Reply


@okareaman 1 year

Replying to @phantop 🎙

I had a youtube-dl repository to fix a bug in Twitter video downloads, but I just checked and it's been removed.

Reply


@throwaway4good 1 year

Replying to @phantop 🎙

I don't understand exactly how this works.

Github receives a letter from a private organisation RIAA and then takes down the repository.

How does Github know that this request is proper and youtube-dl is illegal? Just because it comes from RIAA?

Did Github give the repository owners a chance to migrate to another service willing to host their content?

Reply


@gadders 1 year

Replying to @phantop 🎙

This takes me right back to those heady days of DeCSS: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Illegal_number

Reply


@karmasimida 1 year

Replying to @phantop 🎙

I am not buying this.

Does this mean bittorrent client can be taken down as well?

Who is drawing the line here?

Reply


@nullc 1 year

Replying to @phantop 🎙

Because of how github works these moves are much more damaging than you might expect: In addition to revoking your access to the supposed "infringing" work, you also lose access to all your pull request comment traffic and issues -- which, unlike the source code, aren't continually replicated to the systems of all developers.

Reply


@Stephen304 1 year

Replying to @phantop 🎙



@andrey_utkin 1 year

Replying to @phantop 🎙

Who needs Peertube when there's Youtube, some people asked yesterday: https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=24855183

Reply


@Ansil849 1 year

Replying to @phantop 🎙

So the RIAA has tech folks just like any other organization. Some of those tech folks likely read HN. Question for you folks (use throwaways if you feel it could jeopardize your job): how do you ethically justify working for such an organization?

Reply


@microcolonel 1 year

Replying to @phantop 🎙

Can we pool funds to turn this into a lawsuit?

Reply


@l0b0 1 year

Replying to @phantop 🎙

I tried cloning the various forks mentioned in these threads. Summarized, I did this:

  $ git clone https://salsa.debian.org/debian/youtube-dl
  $ cd youtube-dl
  $ git remote rename origin salsa-debian-org
  $ git remote add -f code-hackerspace-pl https://code.hackerspace.pl/q3k/youtube-dl
  $ git remote add -f git-technik-io https://git.teknik.io/ytdl-org/youtube-dl
  $ git remote add -f ytld-org https://gitlab.com/ytdl-org/youtube-dl
  $ git remote add -f gitea-eponym-info https://gitea.eponym.info/Mirrors/youtube-dl.git
  $ git remote add -f gitee-com https://gitee.com/mirrors/youtube-downloader.git
Basically, it looks like https://gitee.com/mirrors/youtube-downloader.git is the most up to date.

The start of the log looks like this:

  $ git log --all --decorate --graph -n2
  * commit 416da574ec0df3388f652e44f7fe71b1e3a4701f (gitee-com/master)
  | Author: Sergey M․ <dstftw@gmail.com>
  | Date:   Fri Oct 23 21:31:37 2020 +0700
  | 
  |     [ytsearch] Fix extraction (closes #26920)
  | 
  * commit 48c5663c5f7dd9ecc4720f7c1522627665197939 (ytld-org/master, gitea-eponym-info/master, git-technik-io/master, code-hackerspace-pl/master)
  | Author: Toan Nguyen <davidnguyen1501@gmail.com>
  | Date:   Thu Oct 22 19:15:05 2020 +0700
  | 
  |     [afreecatv] Fix typo (#26970)
The salsa.debian.org repo seems to have diverged a long time ago (commit db29af6d36b3d16614355dac70f22c4f2d8410d2 in 2016??).

Reply


@amatecha 1 year

Replying to @phantop 🎙

Considering YouTube allows Creative-Commons licensed videos[0], how exactly do they suggest we "reuse and edit" videos, as per their own documentation? I'm not seeing any "Download video" button on a CC-licensed video's page, so... am I missing something here, or is one not forced to use a 3rd-party video download utility like youtube-dl to actually "reuse and edit" a CC-licensed video?

[0] https://support.google.com/youtube/answer/2797468?hl=en

Reply


@ffpip 1 year

Replying to @phantop 🎙

I'm surprised they haven't gone after browsers. They would surely have asked Google to display certain messages when a user visits known piracy sites

This website is currently disabled due to a DMCA takedown notice. The website you are trying to access hosts copyrighted content. Please contact support, or seek the copyright holder's permission to access the content.

Reply


@resynth1943 1 year

Replying to @phantop 🎙

There are some mirrors here FYI :: https://resynth1943.net/articles/youtube-dl-takedown/

Self-plug, I know. But I'll update it if anything new comes in.

Reply


@readme 1 year

Replying to @phantop 🎙

If you still have youtube-dl on your system (at least the version distributed on homebrew) your youtube-dl file is compressed. You can get the full source code by chopping the shebang line off the top and unzipping the file.

Reply


@arno1 1 year

Replying to @phantop 🎙

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 48c5663c5 (HEAD -> master, origin/master, origin/HEAD) [afreecatv] Fix typo (#26970) <=== https://gitea.eponym.info/Mirrors/youtube-dl

7d740e7dc [23video] Relax _VALID_URL (#26870) <=== https://gitea.eponym.info/Mirrors/youtube-dl

4eda10499 [utils] Don't attempt to coerce JS strings to numbers in js_to_json (#26851) <=== https://web.archive.org/web/20201018144703if_/https://github...

```

https://tor.stackexchange.com/questions/4855/is-it-possible-...

Reply


@iameli 1 year

Replying to @phantop 🎙

Do you think GitHub automatically enforces these against forks? I wonder how long this will stay up. https://github.com/iameli/youtube-dl

Reply


@Bellamy 1 year

Replying to @phantop 🎙

Where can I find youtube-dl now?

I'm ready to be a sponsor for the project to live further.

Reply


@esalman 1 year

Replying to @phantop 🎙

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

Reply


@nudpiedo 1 year

Replying to @phantop 🎙

It was clear that youtube-dl has always been used for its utility. And the deeper problem here is why aren’t we allowed to do whatever want to whatever is streamed onto our screens? TV shows could be vhs taped without issue as long as not redistributed. For sure we cannot take this fight against google with the American laws, but I think the software was morally correct and should be legally permitted.

Reply


@awwaiid 1 year

Replying to @phantop 🎙

"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." Quick call Pop, Timberlake, and Swift to end this!

Reply


@Lammy 1 year

Replying to @phantop 🎙

> 1 See https://github.com/ytdl-org/youtube-dl/blob/master/README.md....

> Repository unavailable due to DMCA takedown.

How, exactly? This is why I dislike GitHub's "Fork" button, since a takedown of the original takes yours too.

Reply


@antonzabirko 1 year

Replying to @phantop 🎙

What a shocker

Reply


@palashkulsh 1 year

Replying to @phantop 🎙

download it here before its gone from there too https://web.archive.org/web/20201015213331if_/https://github...

Reply


@nickjj 1 year

Replying to @phantop 🎙

Things like this make no sense from the notice:

> The clear purpose of this source code is to (i) circumvent the technological protection measures used by authorized streaming services such as YouTube

Using this logic then OBS or any desktop recording tool is also violating the same measures because you could press record while a Youtube video is playing and wind up with your own locally recorded copy of the video.

Since we're here, let's also say any smart phone is also in violation since they could technically record a Youtube video playing on another device.

Reply


@jchw 1 year

Replying to @phantop 🎙

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 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:

They could, of course, have asked for the code to have been changed. Instead, they attacked the project itself. IANAL, but this seems outrageous the same way DMCA'ing a Bittorrent client would be. This doesn't circumvent DRM like Widevine. I don't understand what leg they have to stand on here.

This feels like DeCSS all over again.

P.S.: They also took down youtube-dlc, even though it's not listed.

[1]: It turns out I am wrong. It wasn't in the readme, but in the test cases. See extractor/youtube.py. To me this seems even more tenuous, but IANAL.

Reply


@choeger 1 year

Replying to @phantop 🎙

This fight against software is growing into bizarre forms. What's next? cURL?

I really wish there was some kind of retribution in the typical OSS licenses. You censor free software, free software censors you. I think these organization would think twice to take down a project if they would immediately lose access to Linux, Apache, Python, et. al.

Reply


@smashah 1 year

Replying to @phantop 🎙

This really needs to stop happening

Reply


@dheera 1 year

Replying to @phantop 🎙

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?

Reply


@Santosh83 1 year

Replying to @phantop 🎙

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.

Reply


@stingraycharles 1 year

Replying to @phantop 🎙

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?

Reply


@ffpip 1 year

Replying to @phantop 🎙



@johnisgood 1 year

Replying to @phantop 🎙

So... what is going to happen to youtube-dl? Will it get renamed considering it supports ~1155 websites (based on docs/supportedsites.md)? If it does get renamed, how are we going to know its name? Where do the developers going to push their changes, where is the development being continued?! Fuck everyone who complies with such retarded laws. Corruption is sometimes good, in cases such as these. :)

Reply


@DoingIsLearning 1 year

Replying to @phantop 🎙

Maybe a stupid question but can the repository just be hosted in a server outside US jurisdiction and everyone carries on as before?

Why do I need to be denied access to a repo if I'm outside the US?

Reply


@vms20591 1 year

Replying to @phantop 🎙

This was bound to happen with proprietary services like GitHub. It's better to use self-hostable services like GitLab & Gitea, where we can have regular backups of everything - code, issues and any other metadata. So, the service can be up shortly.

Sure, GitHub like features offer more than just a space to host our code. It has become a goto site for example, finding new and interesting repos to contribute to.

It's important that the devs or community that develop a software think about the potential censorship it might have to encounter from thugs like DMCA, based on what is it that they develop and evaluate the choice of hosting.

Reply


@robgibbons 1 year

Replying to @phantop 🎙

As long as the source code in the repo itself does not infringe on their copyrights, this seems like a plainly frivolous lawsuit.

Reply


@sj_krueger 1 year

Replying to @phantop 🎙

I have created the youtube-dl repo at Darktea, feel free to create your anonymous accounts and join the project, until we find a better/decentralized place.

For now this should be sufficient:

http://it7otdanqu7ktntxzm427cba6i53w6wlanlh23v5i3siqmos47pzh...

I will give the main contributors the neccessary access for reviewing/merging/etc.. or will entirely hand over the project if you can prove you are the maintainer.

Reply


@shmerl 1 year

Replying to @phantop 🎙

They should have counter claimed this nonsense instead of taking down the repo. RIAA is an abusive troll.

Reply


@tpoacher 1 year

Replying to @phantop 🎙

Great. Alternatives to github please.

Reply


@gorgoiler 1 year

Replying to @phantop 🎙

Does a DMCA takedown usually use phrasing “we ask that you do XYZ”?

I’ve never scrutinized one before. I would have assumed it would be of the form “under the terms of the DMCA you are REQUIRED to etc etc”

Reply


@orliesaurus 1 year

Replying to @phantop 🎙

> 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

IMHO this wasn't the best move, I mean... the use of copyrighted music as an example DIRECTLY stated in the repo, as an example to show what you can download with the tool

Reply


@bryanrasmussen 1 year

Replying to @phantop 🎙

I guess this means Brew formula for youtube-dl stops working - mines already installed and I'm not uninstalling to check but it's interesting.

Reply


About Us

site design / logo © 2021 Box Piper