LinuxQuestions.org
Help answer threads with 0 replies.
Go Back   LinuxQuestions.org > Forums > Non-*NIX Forums > General
User Name
Password
General This forum is for non-technical general discussion which can include both Linux and non-Linux topics. Have fun!

Notices


Reply
  Search this Thread
Old 10-24-2020, 01:05 PM   #31
hazel
Senior Member
 
Registered: Mar 2016
Location: Harrow, UK
Distribution: LFS, AntiX, Slackware
Posts: 4,839
Blog Entries: 14

Rep: Reputation: 2727Reputation: 2727Reputation: 2727Reputation: 2727Reputation: 2727Reputation: 2727Reputation: 2727Reputation: 2727Reputation: 2727Reputation: 2727Reputation: 2727

Given all the dirty tricks that the Russian government plays online, I wouldn't trust anything hosted there. Switzerland is the obvious place.
 
Old 10-24-2020, 01:24 PM   #32
mralk3
Senior Member
 
Registered: May 2015
Distribution: Slackware, OpenBSD
Posts: 1,464

Rep: Reputation: 827Reputation: 827Reputation: 827Reputation: 827Reputation: 827Reputation: 827Reputation: 827
I download YouTube music videos all the time and and strip the audio with ffmpeg. I don't upload the resulting audio file anywhere and only I listen to the audio. I've done this for years, while using a paid for Google Suite account. I even store some of the resulting music on Google Drive. If a video is not to be downloaded, Google usually notifies by blocking the download. Surely, if google doesn't care, why does the RIAA care?

Hasn't anyone heard of the Futuristic Sex Robotz? This song is applicable in this case. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=SnLB8wysMbY
 
Old 10-24-2020, 01:49 PM   #33
ondoho
LQ Addict
 
Registered: Dec 2013
Posts: 15,809
Blog Entries: 9

Rep: Reputation: 4637Reputation: 4637Reputation: 4637Reputation: 4637Reputation: 4637Reputation: 4637Reputation: 4637Reputation: 4637Reputation: 4637Reputation: 4637Reputation: 4637
From this thread (not slackware-specific):
Quote:
https://github.com/github/dmca/blob/...-10-23-RIAA.md

The RIAA complained about youtube-dl, github took the repo offline immediately.

Hacker News discussion

After reading a bit I realise that what happened is specific to the US legal system - gihub.com is forced to comply with the takedown immediately, otherwise they're becoming a target of possible legal claims just like the developers of youtube-dl.
So that makes the really fast takedown understandable:
Also see:
https://tildes.net/~tech/suf/youtube...down_from_riaa
https://old.reddit.com/r/programming..._riaa/g9sm6pp/
I've said it many times: don't host your stuff on servers subject to US law!

Interesting: youtube itself does not seem to be affected by any of this.

Many people are cloning the repo, or putting their local copies online,
You can find them on https://gitea.eponym.info/, https://notabug.org/ and even github itself: https://github.com/search?q=RIAA+youtube-dl
Youtube-dl's own web page still works.

So the current version is safe, but I am worried about continued, centralised development...
I hope ytdl devs will post sth on their site. Also how to support them if it should come to a lawsuit.

I have a feeling we have been at similar points many times over the past decade or so, and that's what it always comes down to.
I mean, bittorrent clients are still legal, and I'm sure there was a very similar thing happening there ~10y ago?

I liked this comment on the ycombinator thread:
Quote:
Quote:
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.
Oh and don't think for one moment that the RIAA's actions have anything to do with supporting the struggling artist.

It appears RIAA's main reasoning is that parts of the code contain actual links to RIAA member companies' material is being used for examples. I don't think they can attack the code itself, unless they get youtube itself behind them.
 
Old 10-24-2020, 05:37 PM   #34
drgibbon
Member
 
Registered: Nov 2014
Distribution: Slackware64 -current
Posts: 844

Rep: Reputation: 589Reputation: 589Reputation: 589Reputation: 589Reputation: 589Reputation: 589
Quote:
Originally Posted by LuckyCyborg View Post
The Youtube have a Premium plan, which offers you also the ability to download your favorite videos, then using any other methods for downloading videos from the video streaming platform Youtube is pirating.
Despite the name, youtube-dl downloads the file contents of many servers (not just YouTube), which is exactly what your browser is doing anyway, so welcome to the Internet (and as others have pointed out, copyright law differs around the world).

But more generally, if you don't believe in computing freedom and the freedom of a networked machine to manipulate received data as the user sees fit, then you should support DRM in everything and while you're at it why not just go full proprietary? That'll really lock 'em down! As for poor YouTube, GOOGL had a paltry net income of $34,343,000,000 USD in 2019, so I agree we ought to be feeling very sorry for them, threatened as they are by these vicious and amoral pirates. Go get 'em!
 
Old 10-25-2020, 01:11 AM   #35
bassmadrigal
LQ Guru
 
Registered: Nov 2003
Location: West Jordan, UT, USA
Distribution: Slackware
Posts: 7,512

Rep: Reputation: 5163Reputation: 5163Reputation: 5163Reputation: 5163Reputation: 5163Reputation: 5163Reputation: 5163Reputation: 5163Reputation: 5163Reputation: 5163Reputation: 5163
Quote:
Originally Posted by jr_bob_dobbs View Post
What I find intersting is this: youtube-dl's source code is under the GPL. Thus shutting it down is (a) nonsensical and (b) illegal.
Just because code is GPL doesn't mean it's immune from acts like getting shut down. If so, why would github even entertain DMCA notices? They're owned by Microsoft and have plenty of lawyers on retainer if they wanted to make that argument, but it's not a valid argument, so they comply when there's DMCA takedown requests.

Now, since the code is GPL, there's no way it'll ever go away. Too many people have the source code and there's no way the RIAA can get rid of everybody's copy. It is likely that the yt-dl developers will find a new host for their source control (if they aren't fighting the takedown with github and/or the RIAA).

Quote:
Originally Posted by LuckyCyborg View Post
How youtube-dl is a tool to hack and/or pirate the Youtube servers, I believe that is better if a moderator could say a more entitled opinion about discussing youtube-dl's legal issues and takedowns...
youtube-dl is a downloader. It was primarily made for YouTube (hence the name), but supports TONS of sites that also provide legal downloading. It is nice to throw a NASA or PBS link into youtube-dl and have the copy on my computer. Sure, there's probably a link on the site to grab it, but the tool makes it easy.

wget can also be used to download illegal material. ktorrent as well. And then there's the almighty Firefox (there's so much illegal stuff it can download... including downloading cars (but these are free)). Should we not discuss these on LQ either?

Quote:
Originally Posted by LuckyCyborg View Post
Please note that the downloading of videos is a payed service on Youtube - at least from what I known.
It doesn't allow you to "download" them as files. It permits you to cache them on your device to be played in the YouTube app at a later time... with DRM (meaning in 30 or so days, the video won't work anymore unless you reconnect). If you're on a computer, there's no possibility to download/cache from YouTube with a paid subscription, it's only for mobile. The only saving you can do on a normal computer is saving it to a playlist.
 
Old 10-25-2020, 05:21 AM   #36
ondoho
LQ Addict
 
Registered: Dec 2013
Posts: 15,809
Blog Entries: 9

Rep: Reputation: 4637Reputation: 4637Reputation: 4637Reputation: 4637Reputation: 4637Reputation: 4637Reputation: 4637Reputation: 4637Reputation: 4637Reputation: 4637Reputation: 4637
Always people fail to understand that watching an online video already is downloading it...
Or as the previous poster wrote:
Quote:
wget can also be used to download illegal material. ktorrent as well. And then there's the almighty Firefox (there's so much illegal stuff it can download...
I'm sure the RIAA's claim leans strongly on the fact that there are some actual links to actual artists' material in youtube-dl's source code.
In other words, once this is removed (along with re-wording some rather explicit instructions) I don't think they can touch youtube-dl the code at all, as per above quote.

I just hope this blows over quickly so that development can continue and not too many devs are scared off.

Speaking of which, I truly hoped I'd see some statements of youtube-dl (main) devs by now?

Last edited by ondoho; 10-25-2020 at 05:22 AM.
 
Old 10-25-2020, 06:15 AM   #37
ZhaoLin1457
Member
 
Registered: Jan 2018
Posts: 496

Rep: Reputation: 529Reputation: 529Reputation: 529Reputation: 529Reputation: 529Reputation: 529
Quote:
Originally Posted by bassmadrigal View Post
It doesn't allow you to "download" them as files. It permits you to cache them on your device to be played in the YouTube app at a later time... with DRM (meaning in 30 or so days, the video won't work anymore unless you reconnect). If you're on a computer, there's no possibility to download/cache from YouTube with a paid subscription, it's only for mobile. The only saving you can do on a normal computer is saving it to a playlist.
Then, manipulating the Youtube services to "download" videos as files is at least an abuse of Youtube servers.

Not to not notice that you explain clearly that youtube-dl is a tool which in fact helps users to do DRM infringements. Then LC's right: youtube-dl is a hack tool at least.

My humble question is: why someone should insist to hack or abuse the Youtube servers to download videos as files and even doing DRM infringements, when they clearly does not allows that, using questionable tools?

Isn't more logical to just use a site which allows that? Maybe someone out there offers this videos download as a feature?

Last edited by ZhaoLin1457; 10-25-2020 at 06:28 AM.
 
Old 10-25-2020, 06:18 AM   #38
ZhaoLin1457
Member
 
Registered: Jan 2018
Posts: 496

Rep: Reputation: 529Reputation: 529Reputation: 529Reputation: 529Reputation: 529Reputation: 529
Quote:
Originally Posted by ondoho View Post
Always people fail to understand that watching an online video already is downloading it...
From what I read, even on this very thread, always people fail to understand that Youtube does not allows downloading the videos as files...

From what I know, watching videos from Youtube is not a freedom guaranteed by whatever country Constitution, but a privilege.

Last edited by ZhaoLin1457; 10-25-2020 at 06:35 AM.
 
Old 10-25-2020, 06:40 AM   #39
bassmadrigal
LQ Guru
 
Registered: Nov 2003
Location: West Jordan, UT, USA
Distribution: Slackware
Posts: 7,512

Rep: Reputation: 5163Reputation: 5163Reputation: 5163Reputation: 5163Reputation: 5163Reputation: 5163Reputation: 5163Reputation: 5163Reputation: 5163Reputation: 5163Reputation: 5163
Quote:
Originally Posted by ZhaoLin1457 View Post
Then, manipulating the Youtube services to "download" videos as files is at least an abuse of Youtube servers. Not to not notice that you explain clearly that youtube-dl is a tool which in fact do DRM infringements. Then LC's right: youtube-dl is a hack tool.

My humble question is: why someone should insists to hack the Youtube servers to download videos and even doing DRM infringements, when they does not allow that, using questionable tools?

Isn't more logical to just use a site which allows that? Maybe someone out there offers this videos download as a feature?
Let me clear up your confusion... youtube-dl isn't circumventing DRM. DRM isn't used to play any of the normal YouTube videos (DRM *might* be used with their premium "YouTube Originals", but I've never checked them out and never tried youtube-dl on them). youtube-dl simply parses the webpage you provide it. If it is one of the 1000+ supported sites, it will download the video in the format/size you requested. If there is DRM, youtube-dl WON'T work.

The paid version of YouTube that was mentioned a few times allows you to cache YouTube videos on your mobile device. I believe those cached videos contain DRM, but I haven't verified on my personal devices (I do have YouTube Premium lumped in with my Google Play Music subscription). It is by no means the equivalent of what youtube-dl offers.

Yes, there might be sites that prohibit the usage of a program like youtube-dl in their terms and conditions, but there's also sites supported by youtube-dl that don't have any issues with it.

Again, I'll ask the question of, why is youtube-dl so bad compared to ktorrent, wget, or a web browser itself? Or Linux when it is "used for hacking"? Tools are tools. If they're used for illegal things, then that is on the user, not the tool. youtube-dl is simply a program that parses sites for links and will download any that are supported. If you use that to do illegal things, then you will be held accountable if found by the proper authorities. That isn't the tool's fault.
 
Old 10-25-2020, 08:01 AM   #40
kgha
Member
 
Registered: May 2018
Location: Sweden
Distribution: Slackware 64 -current multilib from AlienBob's LiveSlak MATE
Posts: 373

Rep: Reputation: 278Reputation: 278Reputation: 278
Quote:
Originally Posted by ZhaoLin1457 View Post
From what I read, even on this very thread, always people fail to understand that Youtube does not allows downloading the videos as files...
Depends. When reading the terms of service at Youtube's Swedish website, it says that downloading is prohibited unless permitted by youtube OR permitted by law. And Swedish copyright law allows me to download publicly accessible stuff for personal use. Other countries might have different legislation, and I guess that youtube's terms of service might differ too.

As for DRM protected stuff, youtube-dl can't decrypt DRM protected files.

Last edited by kgha; 10-25-2020 at 08:03 AM.
 
Old 10-25-2020, 08:44 AM   #41
boughtonp
Member
 
Registered: Feb 2007
Location: UK
Distribution: Debian
Posts: 781

Rep: Reputation: 560Reputation: 560Reputation: 560Reputation: 560Reputation: 560Reputation: 560
Quote:
Originally Posted by jr_bob_dobbs View Post
What I find intersting is this: youtube-dl's source code is under the GPL.
The sourcecode for youtube-dl is released into the public domain, using The Unlicense.

(This doesn't change anything said in post #35.)



Quote:
Originally Posted by ondoho View Post
Speaking of which, I truly hoped I'd see some statements of youtube-dl (main) devs by now?
Isn't standard advice to say nothing at least until you've spoken with a lawyer? I'd not expect anything before Monday at the very earliest, and probably not anything substantial then.

The website does contain the note "Currently our dev repository is taken down due to DMCA takedown notice by RIAA. Downloads still work as usual." - Added between 7:17 and 9:05 yesterday. (I'm assuming UTC, but don't see it stated anywhere.)

Last edited by boughtonp; 10-25-2020 at 08:47 AM.
 
Old 10-25-2020, 09:27 AM   #42
GazL
LQ Guru
 
Registered: May 2008
Distribution: CRUX
Posts: 5,604
Blog Entries: 5

Rep: Reputation: 3465Reputation: 3465Reputation: 3465Reputation: 3465Reputation: 3465Reputation: 3465Reputation: 3465Reputation: 3465Reputation: 3465Reputation: 3465Reputation: 3465
What you also have to remember is that youtube was not originally intended as a place for RIAA members to push their wares. As its name suggests it was a site for people sick of mainstream content to share their own self-created content with others. Now, unfortunately, as with anything that gets popular, people wanted to make money, and the RIAA, smelling money, wanted their--and a good portion of everyone else's-- piece of the pie.

youtube-dl has been around a long time, long before youtube included monitized/sanctioned RIAA member copyrighted material. To suggest the tool was written in order to support copyright infringement is nonsense.

aside: before html5 video support was common and flashplayer didn't have a 64bit version, youtube-dl was the only way to watch youtube content on 64bit linux.

Including example invocations targetting copyright material was a big mistake, but that by itself doesn't mean that the tool's primary purpose is to enable copyright infringement. That's a stretch.
Besides, the majority of RIAA content isn't worth listening too once, let alone "stealing" (to use the RIAA's own emotional language) in order to rewatch.

Of course, the DMCA law was bought and paid for by the RIAA/MPAA and intentionally lacks all the checks and balances that would make it fair and have meaningful punishment for abusive use of it. So, here we are today.
 
Old 10-25-2020, 09:28 AM   #43
wpeckham
Senior Member
 
Registered: Apr 2010
Location: Continental USA
Distribution: Debian, Ubuntu, Fedora, RedHat, DSL, Puppy, CentOS, Knoppix, Mint-DE, Sparky, Vsido, tinycore, Q4OS
Posts: 3,491

Rep: Reputation: 1543Reputation: 1543Reputation: 1543Reputation: 1543Reputation: 1543Reputation: 1543Reputation: 1543Reputation: 1543Reputation: 1543Reputation: 1543Reputation: 1543
I have a feeling that
#1 development will move to another storage site (most likely running GIT) and continue.
#2 if it reaches a court and the lawyers for the team are adequate, Google (NOT the RIAA, they are not involved at all) will fail.
It must be staged correctly, but most use is legal and covered under fair use provisions of law.

I only use it for downloading Johnathon Coulton videos, which are all Creative Commons Licensed and downloading them cannot be an infringement of any laws.

BTW: the letter came from youtube/google/alphabet not the RIAA. The title of the thread is misleading in that respect.
 
Old 10-25-2020, 10:24 AM   #44
GazL
LQ Guru
 
Registered: May 2008
Distribution: CRUX
Posts: 5,604
Blog Entries: 5

Rep: Reputation: 3465Reputation: 3465Reputation: 3465Reputation: 3465Reputation: 3465Reputation: 3465Reputation: 3465Reputation: 3465Reputation: 3465Reputation: 3465Reputation: 3465
Quote:
Originally Posted by wpeckham View Post
BTW: the letter came from youtube/google/alphabet not the RIAA. The title of the thread is misleading in that respect.
How does that work? Google don't own the copyright on the content simply for hosting it. How do they have standing?

Quote:
Dear Sir or Madam:

I am contacting you on behalf of the Recording Industry Association of America, Inc. (RIAA) and its member record companies.
.. snip ...
You may contact me at RIAA, [private] Tel. [private],
or email [private] to discuss this notice.

Sincerely,
Looks like the RIAA to me.

Last edited by GazL; 10-25-2020 at 10:34 AM.
 
Old 10-25-2020, 12:19 PM   #45
PROBLEMCHYLD
Senior Member
 
Registered: Apr 2015
Posts: 1,059

Rep: Reputation: Disabled
I guess google want to kill all the competition.
 
  


Reply


Thread Tools Search this Thread
Search this Thread:

Advanced Search

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is Off
HTML code is Off



Similar Threads
Thread Thread Starter Forum Replies Last Post
My web server has been hacked. SU password has been disabled rcrosoer Linux - Security 11 06-27-2008 03:18 PM
I've nixed my nic's bobaye Linux - Wireless Networking 3 02-14-2008 04:36 PM
LXer: The "Nixed Report" Vista Challenge LXer Syndicated Linux News 5 04-05-2007 08:00 AM
LXer: RIAA Case Against Mother Dismissed With Prejudice; Court May Award Attorneys Fees Against RIAA LXer Syndicated Linux News 0 07-14-2006 09:21 AM

LinuxQuestions.org > Forums > Non-*NIX Forums > General

All times are GMT -5. The time now is 07:25 AM.

Main Menu
Advertisement
My LQ
Write for LQ
LinuxQuestions.org is looking for people interested in writing Editorials, Articles, Reviews, and more. If you'd like to contribute content, let us know.
Main Menu
Syndicate
RSS1  Latest Threads
RSS1  LQ News
Twitter: @linuxquestions
Open Source Consulting | Domain Registration