- Joined
- Mar 10, 2019
They should just make it illegal to refuse a gift song from Russell Greer.
youtube-dl DMCA'd by the RIAA - RIAA and MPAA are on a mass takedown spree
- Thread starter Sage In All Fields
- Start date
- Joined
- Sep 7, 2016
Oh they have tried so many things over the years. Remember the secret rootkit? Or how they tried to sue manufacturers of MP3 players?
In the EU they successfully pushed for a storage medium tax on every burnable CD and DVD sold, later expanded to USB drives and harddrives - taxed per megabyte. A shitty Shakira album might be 80 megs in MP3 and Doom from Steam is 100GB but someone could be storing an awful lot of copies of that Shakira album on a 4TB drive.
It's not a lot of money but they're skimming it from every piece of recordable or storage medium on behalf of artists that won't ever see a cent of that money, it goes straight into the retarded crusade war chest.
cecograph
kiwifarms.net
- Joined
- Oct 17, 2018
There are no limitations. I stopped using Github for non-work stuff after its acquisition by Microsoft, and just put all my git repos across my various machines and VPS's. I access them using the basic git ssh interface. A TOR service wouldn't be difficult.
But we're not talking about the various ways you can host a git repository. We're talking about github, which is maddeningly conflated with git. It's the million dollar question: why is one of the most bullet proof decentralised and free technologies out there, Git, being used almost entirely via commercial, extremely centralised entities that're willing to boot you to satisfy DMCA trolls? Is Github's issue tracker really that valuable?
It's a bit like Git because it's based on content addressable storage: everything you put on IPFS is accessed via a hash of its content. Git works in a similar way. All the code in your Git repo is stored as a "blob" and accessed via a hash of its content. Both IPFS and Git then use Merkle trees to build data structures on top of this.
Git gets its dynamic parts with references, such as your HEAD, your branches and your tags, which, unlike your blobs, are more like traditional state. For IPFS, the dynamic situation is still an open problem, but they've had IPNS for a long time. For something that aims for complete decentralisation, dynamic state is a problem of consensus, and so there have been the inevitable blockchain proposals.
- Joined
- Feb 3, 2013
I don't know about you, but I don't have any code that's worth running and securely maintaining a server on the public internet for.
One might just as well ask why people use commercial email providers instead of self-hosting.
cecograph
kiwifarms.net
- Joined
- Oct 17, 2018
There are a huge number of email providers available, and most professionals don't tie their email identity to their provider. If gmail boots you, you just move somewhere else, change a DNS record, and no-one need be the wiser. Same goes for web hosting. "youtube-dl" have their own website, and if their host boots them, they move somewhere else, update a DNS record, and no-one need be the wiser. This is how the internet's supposed to resist censorious motherfuckers.
It is not the case with git. youtube-dl got booted from github, and now we're having a meltdown as if this situation wasn't spectacularly predictable. I will continue to note the irony that git, the premier decentralised VCS, is used by people relying entirely on centralised and censorious motherfuckers.
- Joined
- Aug 5, 2019
We have the technology, it's just illegal to own recreational nukes thanks to revisionist readings of the second amendment
- Joined
- Aug 5, 2019
Some madlad just pushed the entire repo into GitHub's DMCA repo, you can only access it if you have the hash: https://github.com/github/dmca/tree/416da574ec0df3388f652e44f7fe71b1e3a4701f
Last edited:
- Joined
- Oct 31, 2017
What's the big deal? Can someone explain? I understand the significance of the repo being hosted on GitHub, but RIAA's case seems shaky at best, and I'm pretty sure it's standard to take down anything immediately when a DMCA takedown hits, and keep it Off The God Damn Internet right until it's proven to be legal.
No, it's not standard to take something down immediately when a DMCA takedown notice is received, see KF for instance. Search a little about DMCA notices. And it doesn't stay off the internet "until it's proven legal". Example: I now decree that your use of the letter "l" is violating my copyright. Stay off the internet until you prove it's legal in a court of law. See how it doesn't work like this?
Somebody mentioned studies about piracy, here are two that show that illegal copies boost sales (a recent one and one from three years ago):
Somebody wrote that the music industry should be destroyed. I myself wouldn't go so far, I mean from Chopin to <insert stupid song> artists like to buy things and if they don't sell their music at all they can't pay their rent. And it's a risky business, if they know nothing else except making music, they are much more likely statistically to be unsuccessful than not.
And somebody wrote "why do people use commercial e-mail servers and not host their own?". Imho because people in general, on average, don't know how to use dovecot and postfix. Also slightly unrelated, but consider that once server space was limited, so it was normal to use POP3/SMTP and keep nothing on the server and only send and receive e-mails during the short data connection, keeping it all local.
Going after youtube-dl seems to me also a publicity stunt. I think people who have Linux and know how to use youtube-dl also know how to use other ad-skippers and other downloaders.
And the RIAA lawyers have to justify their salaries, so they came up with this. But I think it's useless, github complied and probably something will turn out called "notyt-dl" and the source code will say do not use it for illegal downloads, like torrent programs give as examples "when you want to distribute your essays or family pictures".
Idk, were I github or a yt-dl developer I would ask a lawyer if I could answer "dear RIAA, thanks for pointing out the references to copyrighted work, the references have been removed and the source code now states that users should check their local laws before using the software". Imho it will become one of those things that are legal to own but not to use - like speed cameras apps in a few countries, which depending on the country, do not write "speed camera ahead" but "attention zone ahead".
I therefore would like to point out that the RIAA disapproves that people go to www.yt-dl.org and download the latest copy of youtube-dl . Using it to download videos from YT seems a violation of their terms of service.
Should a search engine index " where do I download youtube-dl? Answer: www.yt-dl.org " they may be allowing circumvention software to spread, especially as there (on www.yt-dl.org ), comprehensive instructions for installation on Windows, MacOS and Linux can be found and I would not want people to commit crimes by going to www.yt-dl.org and downloading the latest copy of youtube-dl.
- Joined
- Aug 5, 2019
That's a problem with their business model, I don't see how that gives them the right to dictate to me what I can do with my computer. Them at some point deciding to arrange bits a certain way doesn't give them the right to tell me that I cannot also arrange bits in a similar way.
- Joined
- May 26, 2020
Yesterday youtube-dl was mirrored as a torrent and indexed on TPB.
- Joined
- Dec 28, 2014
Nice but it will be out of date in a week or so. This is a package that really depends on frequent updates especially since YT and other sites actively try to break it.
- Joined
- Mar 10, 2019
It's pretty darn standard, actually. There aren't many content hosts willing to put their necks on the line to get sued for a user. They've got nothing to lose by just taking the content down; they can't be held liable for doing so.
- Joined
- Jun 19, 2017
Guys come on be super fair, those ultra rich Artists and Companies do NEED there unnecessary amounts of money. What are you, greedy, hand over your life savings right now and buy all of our shit you shit lord. Kayne West needs another ultra Mansion.
- Joined
- Sep 23, 2018
I think everyone knows this but the point is to ensure the Streisand Effect plays out. "You're trying to this down? Well, fuck you, we're going to ensure it's easier to get than ever."
(Also, it's been a while since I've done anything with torrents, but isn't it possible to add files to a "live" torrent which just wouldn't be downloaded by those who had already finished downloading a previous state of its files? I might be thinking of something else.)
- Joined
- Feb 27, 2020
Looking around through some of the git sites that were reccomended in favor of Github and came across hypervideo, supposedly a fork of youtube-dl that uses Invidious's API.
Hopefully this one takes off and the RIAA will stop caring because it doesn't have the Funny Copyrighted Youtube Video examples. But I'm not a programming dude (or at least one that cares enough to fuck around with Youtube related API) so I dunno maybe this one is shit too.
Hopefully this one takes off and the RIAA will stop caring because it doesn't have the Funny Copyrighted Youtube Video examples. But I'm not a programming dude (or at least one that cares enough to fuck around with Youtube related API) so I dunno maybe this one is shit too.
Last edited:
- Joined
- Mar 30, 2020
I guess I will just have to dig up my old cassette deck and run my audio out through it. Check mate RIAA.
- Joined
- Dec 19, 2019
I wonder if Debian is going to patch out the supposedly infringing test code.
Youtube (Google) has an uneasy agreement with the RIAA, so if you post copyrighted material outside the scope of their settlement and someone notices, they take it down. I regularly get warnings on things in my playlists of such disappeared videos.
That was the Fraunhofer Gesellschaft, over a patent on one of their music compression codecs. It elicited the ogg/vorbis project to produce a cleanroom, patent-free codec.
ScatmansWorld
kiwifarms.net
- Joined
- Oct 27, 2019
To be fair to the greed fueled corporate overlords of the RIAA, using copyrighted songs as examples of what you could download was probably the dumbest thing the youtube-dl team could of done. Any software/service even tangentially related to piracy has some big disclaimer that says "THIS IS NOT INTENDED TO BE USED FOR COPYRIGHT INFRINGEMENT" to cover their ass, even if that's what 99% of their userbase uses it for.
- Joined
- Aug 16, 2020
Funnily enough I don't think youtube-dl actually is used for piracy as much as it is for just downloading videos people want to either preserve or just watch or listen to offline.
I've used it to download songs but normally I just use it to grab videos that I would expect to be taken down or that are are just generally interesting.
Maybe I'm ignorant but I just think if music is what you're after then there are better ways to get it than youtube, assuming you care about quality at all.
I've used it to download songs but normally I just use it to grab videos that I would expect to be taken down or that are are just generally interesting.
Maybe I'm ignorant but I just think if music is what you're after then there are better ways to get it than youtube, assuming you care about quality at all.