7 ms·

The End of ProTube 2

142 points by cdransf 9y ago

matthew349hall 9y ago
Well that sucks. I never used ProTube but it looks like it was a great app.
CryoLogic 9y ago
Censorship, monetization algo changes, dark ux patterns, buying whitelist space on adblockers, political bias coded directly into search algo... I do hope the future holds something better for the consumer than YouTube
- TheAdamAndChe 9y ago
  Unfortunately, most industries on the internet are winner-take-all due to the network effect. Without significant government intervention, which comes with its own problems if done poorly, monopolies on the internet are nearly inevitable.
  - badestrand 9y ago
    I would love a regulation for companies that they must make all user contributed data freely available for everyone. This way YouTube (and Facebook and Twitter and...) would not be a data silo but just one of many access portals to that data. I know this is a question of values, of what is considered "just". But for me it would feel fair if all the 20k reviews of the nearby mall on Google maps would not be Google's property but belong to everyone, since many many people contributed to it out of goodwill.
- programmarchy 9y ago
  Bitchute looks like a good up and coming contender. The UI is similar to YouTube, but the content is distributed using WebTorrent.
  - j_s 9y ago
    Maybe they'll add a dash in their name a la expertsexchange...
covercash 9y ago
ProTube actually got me using YouTube on a regular basis and became part of my nightly routine - I subscribed to channels, occasionally commented, made playlists... I even started using the (terrible) YouTube app on the Apple TV from time to time. Boy is it bad! Before ProTube, I only watched YouTube content when it was embedded in sites I was browsing. Hopefully the current version works long enough for me to figure out a replacement (either for the app or for YouTube itself.)
- yladiz 9y ago
  It looks like, as long as the app can use the API, it'll stay updated for iOS 11 (the author states he updated it as soon as he could), and so it'll likely function for a while.
  - covercash 9y ago
    Yeah, I'm using it on iOS 11 and it works great (although I don't love the new native video UI Apple is going with) - my concern is that YT will be dicks and kill access through the API. I sure hope not.
    - on_and_off 9y ago
      > YT will be dicks and kill access through the API how is that dickish ? They seem pretty gracious right now to have let the API key work for so long while it breaks half their TOS.
- asciimo 9y ago
  In my experience, all of the AppleTV apps suck, but YouTube, Netflix, and Hulu are the most egregious. I suspect they're all required to use the same alien design specification.
userbinator 9y ago
If you use closed platforms tightly controlled by large companies, it's not surprising that things like this will happen. Meanwhile, on my desktop I use a downloader script that continues to work flawlessly for some of those usecases described in the article; it doesn't use the "official API", but mimics what a browser would do, so YouTube would have to stop working in the browser to stop that from working.
- ioquatix 9y ago
  Can you put it on GitHub? :)
  - cyphar 9y ago
    youtube-dl is the best media download suite I've seen. It worked for any video hosting site I've ever pointed it at, and it even has options to use ffmpeg to recode the video or extract the audio track. In addition, NewPipe also does a similar thing (it's a free software Android app that has much more features than the official app -- such as playing in the background and as an overlaid tile).
    - rocky1138 9y ago
      The fact that it has a built-in switch for extracting the sound from a video to MP3 has made my library very happy.
  - pkrefta 9y ago
    You should try also Youtube-dl - amazing piece of kit :)
    - feelin_googley 9y ago
      As I do not include Python in my system images I wrote a very reliable youtube download script that uses only sh, sed and an http client, where http client is fetch, ftp, curl, wget, or some similar program. Currently it is at 1205 characters, or 1205 bytes. No "developer API" needed.
yladiz 9y ago
As much as it sucks for the author, if you're providing a service or app on top of another service (like providing a better way to browse a website's content or API) you're really at the mercy of that service provider, especially if you've registered to use their API. If they want to squash your service/app, they can either just revoke your API access, or just find some violation of their TOS, or just create one with a TOS update. Then they can report you to the respective app store (App Store, Google Play Store) and most likely get it removed. Without looking at the Youtube TOS, I wouldn't be surprised if there was a section that explicitly disallows paid apps besides Youtube's, probably to prevent competitors for their Youtube Red app. Although I wouldn't have bought it since the plain Youtube app is fine for me, it looks like he put a lot of work and soul into the app, and I feel for him. I also appreciate the level headedness of the statement, explaining the situation without much vitriol, although I'm surprised he doesn't mention anything about one of the issues Google likely had, which was ad-blocking (see edit below). Good luck to him on his next project. Edit: It looks like the author of the app likely got in a lot of trouble with Google for not having ads when playing videos, on top of the other issues, a commenter below points out. I think it's a little disingenuous of the author to not put this in his statement as I'm sure Google wasn't happy about it (and probably said so in the emails) and it's likely another violation of the TOS (and I'm surprised they haven't pulled/didn't pull API access). What I said still stands, but he should be more direct about the issues that Google had.
- Kequc 9y ago
  This is an argument against the authoritarian character of the Apple App Store and by extension it's operating system that doesn't allow you to use anything else. Does anybody actually like having a walled off heavily regulated user experience after they've spent so much money on a device? Or are people still just pretending they do. Without having even so much as the option of installing a third party application without going through the Apple App Store. Seems like stretching it, nobody can like that. He should be able to sell the App standalone. There is no technical reason why not, it's a political one from Apple to artificially limit this functionality. They spent money making sure you couldn't do it.
  - 9y ago
adamnemecek 9y ago
This is fucked up. I really liked the app. No google, I dont want to pay you 10 usd monthly so that I can listen to music on your app when it's in the background.
- cyphar 9y ago
  If you are fine with sideloading apps, NewPipe is a free software YouTube client app that supports that and many other features.
  - deleted 9y ago
    [deleted]
- ucaetano 9y ago
  No RIAA, I dont want to pay you 10 usd monthly so that I can listen to music on your app when it's in the background. There, I fixed that for you.
  - dannyw 9y ago
    Not everyone uses YouTube to listen to music in the background. I want to listen to podcasts or just listen to videos distributed by casual content creators in the background - they're not forcing me to get YouTube Red, YouTube is. Which is fair, because it's their platform, but to blame it on RIAA is wrong.
Abishek_Muthian 9y ago
When depending upon a 3rd party content in violation of their TOS, it's bound to happen & especially when it's monetised. It's the users who are really getting screwed, probably many of them still don't know the difference between official app and an 3rd party app. The users are of grave risk under such conditions, where if a 3rd party app developer of a famous service decides to sell the app to someone; they could easily pish the unsuspecting user's login credentials. In this case, the developer took the right call to bring down the app. I hope his future endeavours are just as successful without using 3rd party content.
HearMeRoar 9y ago
So, the reason you're not putting it on Cydia is because not many people are going to buy it? Ok. The argument that people will have to buy it again to access it makes no sense, it doesn't matter.
jsjohnst 9y ago
"Do no evil" -- unless it affects the bottom line, of course!
post_break 9y ago
Welp, thanks YouTube, you're ruining everything I like about it. This is right up there with Twitter api tokens. Next anyone uploaded content deemed not advertiser friendly will be banned. Say goodbye to H3H3, and hello to only Casey Neistat. Death by a thousand cuts. Everyone saying "this is why you don't build your business on someone else's X" yeah, we get that, but 3rd parties don't always have to do this.
SeanAnderson 9y ago
Same thing happened with my app, Streamus, a few years ago. https://thenextweb.com/insider/2015/07/21/how-youtube-killed-an-extension-with-300000-users/ https://thenextweb.com/insider/2015/07/21/how-youtube-killed... It's not a surprising outcome, but still unfortunate for both YouTube and consumers.
Veratyr 9y ago
> They basically wanted me to remove every feature that made ProTube what it is – that includes the player itself that allows you to play 60fps videos, background playback, audio only mode and more. > background playback, audio only mode https://developers.google.com/youtube/terms/developer-policies https://developers.google.com/youtube/terms/developer-polici... > You and your API Clients must not, and must not encourage, enable, or require others to: > separate, isolate, or modify the audio or video components of any YouTube audiovisual content made available as part of, or in connection with, YouTube API Services. > promote separately the audio or video components of any YouTube audiovisual content made available as part of, or in connection with, the YouTube API Services; > create, include, or promote features that play content, including audio or video components, from a background player, meaning a player that is not displayed in the page, tab, or screen that the user is viewing; The author blatantly violated YouTube's developer policies then complained that YouTube was upset? Why the victim complex? What did he expect? He's lucky they didn't choose to go down the lawsuit route instead. This doesn't seem like an arbitrary policy either. If he's playing the video where the user can't see it, the user can't see ads. If the user can't see ads, the video creator doesn't get paid.
- comstock 9y ago
  And this should be policed by Apple on Googles behalf, rather than potentially litigated in court? That's the main question in my mind. The functionality could all be implemented without access to the developer API. I think users have a legal right to use Ad blockers, but in this case it can't even be tested, because Apple decided to police their AppStore, against users interests. I'm by no means anti-Apple. I prefer their ecosystem to Android, and feel it is less driven by advertising. But this feels like an anti-user move.
  - Veratyr 9y ago
    It's a paid app facilitating breach of contract at the least and possibly facilitating copyright infringement and a breach of the CFAA. And Apple takes a cut and therefore has legal liability for distributing it.
anon_dev_123456 9y ago
Can I buy and install Protube on my iphone without using the app store?
weeksie 9y ago
Don't build on someone else's platform unless you have a ripcord. :/
- staunch 9y ago
  The platform here is the internet. YouTube is trying to say you can't write custom software that accesses their publicly accessible service. ProTube is nothing more than an alternative user agent that users are choosing to use to interact with the youtube.com service. They should shut down the public youtube.com service if they don't want people to access it in ways that are reasonably fair use.
  - bitmapbrother 9y ago
    No, ProTube used the YouTube API and repeatedly violated the terms of service, which he legally agreed to, and then charged customers for an app that he knew was in clear violation and subject to termination.
    - staunch 9y ago
      Why does he have to agree to the ToS to use the public API? Would it have been okay if he didn't use the API but accessed the same functionality just like you can with a web browser?
      - Operyl 9y ago
        He requested an API key, that's not exactly "public" like you think it it and is subject to the TOS he agreed to.
ucaetano 9y ago
The author expects Google to pay for the storage and bandwidth cost, while the author monetizes that with no revenue sharing? Not only that, the author also refused to release the app for free on Cydia: > Some people might suggest that I re-release ProTube 2 on Cydia. Few people even have jailbroken devices anymore and only a fraction of my user base would be able to access Cydia. Purchases from the App Store also can't be carried over to Cydia so people would have to purchase the app again. And YouTube might still come after me. If the author refuses to give it the app for free, why does he/she expects Google to do the same? And it goes beyond that: none of the money the author makes by stealing traffic from YT goes to the creators. Zero. The author is defunding both the creators and YT while making money for him/herself. If ProTube was free/oss, I could see some valid points behind it, but the creator is actually making money on that copyrighted content. Seriously, why would anyone have any reasonable expectations of a different outcome?
- comstock 9y ago
  Maybe Google/creators need a new business model that doesn't depend on adverts? Your argument is essentially the same one against Adblockers in general.
  - lobster_johnson 9y ago
    Isn't that what they're doing with the YouTube Red thing?
    - comstock 9y ago
      If you can obtain YouTube Red functionality by using an Adblocker, it may not work as a business model...
      - kyrra 9y ago
        Youtube Red features: 1) offline viewing. 2) no ads. 3) original programming. 4) background audio-only playing. 5) Google Play Music subscription.
vortico 9y ago
Yes, he's at the mercy of YouTube since he's building on the platform in violation of its ToS. But as a consumer, you can use the youtube-dl script (https://rg3.github.io/youtube-dl/ https://rg3.github.io/youtube-dl/) along with mpv (https://mpv.io/ https://mpv.io/) to play YouTube videos as you wish. Example: mpv https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=dQw4w9WgXcQ mpv --no-video https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=dQw4w9WgXcQ mpv <pretty much any video / streaming site in existence> Both packages are available in your nearest package manager, i.e. brew for MacOS, MSYS2 for Windows, etc.
staunch 9y ago
1. YouTube built their business on other people's content. Just like LinkedIn, Google, Facebook, Twitter, Craigslist, etc. Aren't we, as the public, entitled to access the data that we, the collective public, have contributed? How many people that uploaded content want to prevent others from privately enjoying it? 2. A federal judge recently ruled that LinkedIn couldn't block a service that was scraping their service. That scraping costs LinkedIn some measurable amount of money, but I personally think that should be a burden they're required to bear. If they don't want that burden, let them shut down the service and allow a new service or technology to replace it.
- bitmapbrother 9y ago
  Is YouTube stopping people from scraping their site?
  - staunch 9y ago
    I guess that's my question.
- eh78ssxv2f 9y ago
  > How many people that uploaded content want to prevent others from privately enjoying it? I thought it was possible for uploaded to turn off the monetization, and then ads won't be shown on that video. Source: https://support.google.com/youtube/answer/94522?hl=en https://support.google.com/youtube/answer/94522?hl=en
GSimon 9y ago
I never knew about ProTube, but since YouTube disabled playing videos in background even on Safari/Chrome it's been very annoying. I used to love listening to long format shows/audio in the background. It's still possible, albeit likely not as good as the ProTube app seemed to be, you just have to load up Youtube and request for the desktop site. The site switches from mobile to desktop and becomes a real pain to use but hey I can play videos in the background again. It's pretty lame of YouTube to do, especially since I can't even buy the paid service if I wanted to (I live in Canada).
- ucaetano 9y ago
  > It's pretty lame of YouTube to do, especially since I can't even buy the paid service if I wanted to (I live in Canada). They don't have the license to do so. Streaming audio requires a different license than streaming video.
  - GSimon 9y ago
    The feeling was just that they pulled the rug away on another feature and didn't provide a solution. Periscope is brutal for this too, I want to listen with the lock screen on in my pocket but that's not happening..
  - roywiggins 9y ago
    YouTube can't stop me minimizing my browser window on the desktop and nobody is accusing them of violating any licenses for failing to prevent me from doing that, so why is mobile different? Just because they have the technical ability to tell the difference?
    - ucaetano 9y ago
      That's not how licensing rights work. Just because you think it is the same, doesn't mean that lawyers will think that.
    - wiredfool 9y ago
      Youtube (in EU at least) has changed recently to make it much harder to play stuff in the background. (use case, full-album audio listening with the screen off) Ads now will interrupt the stream, and it won't continue till it's in the foreground, or there's a click.
naner 9y ago
Wow, if this was any other company this guy would have just been sued. I don't really have a problem with the guy scraping and using other techniques to get around playing ads and other restrictions. But then he turns around and sells it, and then acts like Google is behaving unfairly by shutting him down... what a class act. I find it hard to have any sympathy for this guy.
- comstock 9y ago
  It would have been better if they were sued. Why should we have Apple policing their ecosystem on Googles behalf?
  - ballenf 9y ago
    Because Apple wants to send a message to app creators of original content that Apple has their back. In this case it was Goliath vs. David, but is probably just as often the reverse in terms of parties' sizes.
bitmapbrother 9y ago
I like how this person brags about how successful his app was and how it hit #1 in 10 countries, but neglects to mention how he was continually violating YouTube's terms of service all the while. Here's my favorite part: YouTube wants to sell its $10/month subscription service which offers many features that ProTube also offered for a lower one time price, so they started hunting down 3rd party YouTube apps on the App Store. It's their service so they can charge whatever they want for it because they actually pay the bills to keep the service up and running. What's not okay is for you to sell an app to customers that, you clearly knew, violated YouTube's TOS and was subject to takedown at anytime.
Rjevski 9y ago
Would you mind giving access to the source, so that advanced users can still compile and install their own binary? Happy to pay for it.
- deleted 9y ago
  [deleted]
dzhiurgis 9y ago
Simple Googling revealed this: https://github.com/pieter/YoutubeDL-iOS https://github.com/pieter/YoutubeDL-iOS Anyone can sideload without mercy of Apple, uses infamous youtube-dl. Might try later tonight. Would love author to open source his code or contribute to above mentioned project.
the_mitsuhiko 9y ago
What's so frustrating about this is that yourube does not even sell red here. I cannot pay for what protube enabled.
- rusinov 9y ago
  Unless you use VPN, but this could be a pain.
Wofiel 9y ago
Bit of a shame, I understand the reasoning, but I also understand how poor the existing YouTube app is to this day. I'd be happy with ads, I'd be happy with not being able to download videos, I just wanted to get videos from channels I'd subscribed to and multitask with iOS' native PiP and ProTube let me do that.
Sujan 9y ago
"Interesting" faked whois data on the domain: > Registrant Name: Jonas Gessner > Registrant Street: Infinite Loop 1 > Registrant City: Cupertino > Registrant Postal Code: 95014 > Registrant Country: US > Registrant Phone: +14.089961010
- dawnerd 9y ago
  So not only do they break YouTube tos but they violate icann rules too? Nice. https://www.icann.org/resources/pages/ra-agreement-2009-05-21-en#3.7.7.2 https://www.icann.org/resources/pages/ra-agreement-2009-05-2...
atroll 9y ago
We need an new youtube alternative.

142 points by cdransf 9y ago

Well that sucks. I never used ProTube but it looks like it was a great app.

Censorship, monetization algo changes, dark ux patterns, buying whitelist space on adblockers, political bias coded directly into search algo... I do hope the future holds something better for the consumer than YouTube

TheAdamAndChe 9y ago
Unfortunately, most industries on the internet are winner-take-all due to the network effect. Without significant government intervention, which comes with its own problems if done poorly, monopolies on the internet are nearly inevitable.
- badestrand 9y ago
  I would love a regulation for companies that they must make all user contributed data freely available for everyone. This way YouTube (and Facebook and Twitter and...) would not be a data silo but just one of many access portals to that data. I know this is a question of values, of what is considered "just". But for me it would feel fair if all the 20k reviews of the nearby mall on Google maps would not be Google's property but belong to everyone, since many many people contributed to it out of goodwill.
programmarchy 9y ago
Bitchute looks like a good up and coming contender. The UI is similar to YouTube, but the content is distributed using WebTorrent.
- j_s 9y ago
  Maybe they'll add a dash in their name a la expertsexchange...

covercash 9y ago

ProTube actually got me using YouTube on a regular basis and became part of my nightly routine - I subscribed to channels, occasionally commented, made playlists... I even started using the (terrible) YouTube app on the Apple TV from time to time. Boy is it bad! Before ProTube, I only watched YouTube content when it was embedded in sites I was browsing. Hopefully the current version works long enough for me to figure out a replacement (either for the app or for YouTube itself.)

yladiz 9y ago
It looks like, as long as the app can use the API, it'll stay updated for iOS 11 (the author states he updated it as soon as he could), and so it'll likely function for a while.
- covercash 9y ago
  Yeah, I'm using it on iOS 11 and it works great (although I don't love the new native video UI Apple is going with) - my concern is that YT will be dicks and kill access through the API. I sure hope not.
  - on_and_off 9y ago
    > YT will be dicks and kill access through the API how is that dickish ? They seem pretty gracious right now to have let the API key work for so long while it breaks half their TOS.
asciimo 9y ago
In my experience, all of the AppleTV apps suck, but YouTube, Netflix, and Hulu are the most egregious. I suspect they're all required to use the same alien design specification.

userbinator 9y ago

If you use closed platforms tightly controlled by large companies, it's not surprising that things like this will happen. Meanwhile, on my desktop I use a downloader script that continues to work flawlessly for some of those usecases described in the article; it doesn't use the "official API", but mimics what a browser would do, so YouTube would have to stop working in the browser to stop that from working.

ioquatix 9y ago
Can you put it on GitHub? :)
- cyphar 9y ago
  youtube-dl is the best media download suite I've seen. It worked for any video hosting site I've ever pointed it at, and it even has options to use ffmpeg to recode the video or extract the audio track. In addition, NewPipe also does a similar thing (it's a free software Android app that has much more features than the official app -- such as playing in the background and as an overlaid tile).
  - rocky1138 9y ago
    The fact that it has a built-in switch for extracting the sound from a video to MP3 has made my library very happy.
- pkrefta 9y ago
  You should try also Youtube-dl - amazing piece of kit :)
  - feelin_googley 9y ago
    As I do not include Python in my system images I wrote a very reliable youtube download script that uses only sh, sed and an http client, where http client is fetch, ftp, curl, wget, or some similar program. Currently it is at 1205 characters, or 1205 bytes. No "developer API" needed.

yladiz 9y ago

As much as it sucks for the author, if you're providing a service or app on top of another service (like providing a better way to browse a website's content or API) you're really at the mercy of that service provider, especially if you've registered to use their API. If they want to squash your service/app, they can either just revoke your API access, or just find some violation of their TOS, or just create one with a TOS update. Then they can report you to the respective app store (App Store, Google Play Store) and most likely get it removed. Without looking at the Youtube TOS, I wouldn't be surprised if there was a section that explicitly disallows paid apps besides Youtube's, probably to prevent competitors for their Youtube Red app. Although I wouldn't have bought it since the plain Youtube app is fine for me, it looks like he put a lot of work and soul into the app, and I feel for him. I also appreciate the level headedness of the statement, explaining the situation without much vitriol, although I'm surprised he doesn't mention anything about one of the issues Google likely had, which was ad-blocking (see edit below). Good luck to him on his next project. Edit: It looks like the author of the app likely got in a lot of trouble with Google for not having ads when playing videos, on top of the other issues, a commenter below points out. I think it's a little disingenuous of the author to not put this in his statement as I'm sure Google wasn't happy about it (and probably said so in the emails) and it's likely another violation of the TOS (and I'm surprised they haven't pulled/didn't pull API access). What I said still stands, but he should be more direct about the issues that Google had.

Kequc 9y ago
This is an argument against the authoritarian character of the Apple App Store and by extension it's operating system that doesn't allow you to use anything else. Does anybody actually like having a walled off heavily regulated user experience after they've spent so much money on a device? Or are people still just pretending they do. Without having even so much as the option of installing a third party application without going through the Apple App Store. Seems like stretching it, nobody can like that. He should be able to sell the App standalone. There is no technical reason why not, it's a political one from Apple to artificially limit this functionality. They spent money making sure you couldn't do it.
- 9y ago

adamnemecek 9y ago

This is fucked up. I really liked the app. No google, I dont want to pay you 10 usd monthly so that I can listen to music on your app when it's in the background.

cyphar 9y ago
If you are fine with sideloading apps, NewPipe is a free software YouTube client app that supports that and many other features.
- deleted 9y ago
  [deleted]
ucaetano 9y ago
No RIAA, I dont want to pay you 10 usd monthly so that I can listen to music on your app when it's in the background. There, I fixed that for you.
- dannyw 9y ago
  Not everyone uses YouTube to listen to music in the background. I want to listen to podcasts or just listen to videos distributed by casual content creators in the background - they're not forcing me to get YouTube Red, YouTube is. Which is fair, because it's their platform, but to blame it on RIAA is wrong.

Abishek_Muthian 9y ago

When depending upon a 3rd party content in violation of their TOS, it's bound to happen & especially when it's monetised. It's the users who are really getting screwed, probably many of them still don't know the difference between official app and an 3rd party app. The users are of grave risk under such conditions, where if a 3rd party app developer of a famous service decides to sell the app to someone; they could easily pish the unsuspecting user's login credentials. In this case, the developer took the right call to bring down the app. I hope his future endeavours are just as successful without using 3rd party content.

HearMeRoar 9y ago

So, the reason you're not putting it on Cydia is because not many people are going to buy it? Ok. The argument that people will have to buy it again to access it makes no sense, it doesn't matter.

jsjohnst 9y ago

"Do no evil" -- unless it affects the bottom line, of course!

post_break 9y ago

Welp, thanks YouTube, you're ruining everything I like about it. This is right up there with Twitter api tokens. Next anyone uploaded content deemed not advertiser friendly will be banned. Say goodbye to H3H3, and hello to only Casey Neistat. Death by a thousand cuts. Everyone saying "this is why you don't build your business on someone else's X" yeah, we get that, but 3rd parties don't always have to do this.

SeanAnderson 9y ago

Same thing happened with my app, Streamus, a few years ago. https://thenextweb.com/insider/2015/07/21/how-youtube-killed-an-extension-with-300000-users/ https://thenextweb.com/insider/2015/07/21/how-youtube-killed... It's not a surprising outcome, but still unfortunate for both YouTube and consumers.

Veratyr 9y ago

> They basically wanted me to remove every feature that made ProTube what it is – that includes the player itself that allows you to play 60fps videos, background playback, audio only mode and more. > background playback, audio only mode https://developers.google.com/youtube/terms/developer-policies https://developers.google.com/youtube/terms/developer-polici... > You and your API Clients must not, and must not encourage, enable, or require others to: > separate, isolate, or modify the audio or video components of any YouTube audiovisual content made available as part of, or in connection with, YouTube API Services. > promote separately the audio or video components of any YouTube audiovisual content made available as part of, or in connection with, the YouTube API Services; > create, include, or promote features that play content, including audio or video components, from a background player, meaning a player that is not displayed in the page, tab, or screen that the user is viewing; The author blatantly violated YouTube's developer policies then complained that YouTube was upset? Why the victim complex? What did he expect? He's lucky they didn't choose to go down the lawsuit route instead. This doesn't seem like an arbitrary policy either. If he's playing the video where the user can't see it, the user can't see ads. If the user can't see ads, the video creator doesn't get paid.

comstock 9y ago
And this should be policed by Apple on Googles behalf, rather than potentially litigated in court? That's the main question in my mind. The functionality could all be implemented without access to the developer API. I think users have a legal right to use Ad blockers, but in this case it can't even be tested, because Apple decided to police their AppStore, against users interests. I'm by no means anti-Apple. I prefer their ecosystem to Android, and feel it is less driven by advertising. But this feels like an anti-user move.
- Veratyr 9y ago
  It's a paid app facilitating breach of contract at the least and possibly facilitating copyright infringement and a breach of the CFAA. And Apple takes a cut and therefore has legal liability for distributing it.

anon_dev_123456 9y ago

Can I buy and install Protube on my iphone without using the app store?

weeksie 9y ago

Don't build on someone else's platform unless you have a ripcord. :/

staunch 9y ago
The platform here is the internet. YouTube is trying to say you can't write custom software that accesses their publicly accessible service. ProTube is nothing more than an alternative user agent that users are choosing to use to interact with the youtube.com service. They should shut down the public youtube.com service if they don't want people to access it in ways that are reasonably fair use.
- bitmapbrother 9y ago
  No, ProTube used the YouTube API and repeatedly violated the terms of service, which he legally agreed to, and then charged customers for an app that he knew was in clear violation and subject to termination.
  - staunch 9y ago
    Why does he have to agree to the ToS to use the public API? Would it have been okay if he didn't use the API but accessed the same functionality just like you can with a web browser?
    - Operyl 9y ago
      He requested an API key, that's not exactly "public" like you think it it and is subject to the TOS he agreed to.

ucaetano 9y ago

The author expects Google to pay for the storage and bandwidth cost, while the author monetizes that with no revenue sharing? Not only that, the author also refused to release the app for free on Cydia: > Some people might suggest that I re-release ProTube 2 on Cydia. Few people even have jailbroken devices anymore and only a fraction of my user base would be able to access Cydia. Purchases from the App Store also can't be carried over to Cydia so people would have to purchase the app again. And YouTube might still come after me. If the author refuses to give it the app for free, why does he/she expects Google to do the same? And it goes beyond that: none of the money the author makes by stealing traffic from YT goes to the creators. Zero. The author is defunding both the creators and YT while making money for him/herself. If ProTube was free/oss, I could see some valid points behind it, but the creator is actually making money on that copyrighted content. Seriously, why would anyone have any reasonable expectations of a different outcome?

comstock 9y ago
Maybe Google/creators need a new business model that doesn't depend on adverts? Your argument is essentially the same one against Adblockers in general.
- lobster_johnson 9y ago
  Isn't that what they're doing with the YouTube Red thing?
  - comstock 9y ago
    If you can obtain YouTube Red functionality by using an Adblocker, it may not work as a business model...
    - kyrra 9y ago
      Youtube Red features: 1) offline viewing. 2) no ads. 3) original programming. 4) background audio-only playing. 5) Google Play Music subscription.

vortico 9y ago

Yes, he's at the mercy of YouTube since he's building on the platform in violation of its ToS. But as a consumer, you can use the youtube-dl script (https://rg3.github.io/youtube-dl/ https://rg3.github.io/youtube-dl/) along with mpv (https://mpv.io/ https://mpv.io/) to play YouTube videos as you wish. Example: mpv https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=dQw4w9WgXcQ mpv --no-video https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=dQw4w9WgXcQ mpv <pretty much any video / streaming site in existence> Both packages are available in your nearest package manager, i.e. brew for MacOS, MSYS2 for Windows, etc.

staunch 9y ago

1. YouTube built their business on other people's content. Just like LinkedIn, Google, Facebook, Twitter, Craigslist, etc. Aren't we, as the public, entitled to access the data that we, the collective public, have contributed? How many people that uploaded content want to prevent others from privately enjoying it? 2. A federal judge recently ruled that LinkedIn couldn't block a service that was scraping their service. That scraping costs LinkedIn some measurable amount of money, but I personally think that should be a burden they're required to bear. If they don't want that burden, let them shut down the service and allow a new service or technology to replace it.

bitmapbrother 9y ago
Is YouTube stopping people from scraping their site?
- staunch 9y ago
  I guess that's my question.
eh78ssxv2f 9y ago
> How many people that uploaded content want to prevent others from privately enjoying it? I thought it was possible for uploaded to turn off the monetization, and then ads won't be shown on that video. Source: https://support.google.com/youtube/answer/94522?hl=en https://support.google.com/youtube/answer/94522?hl=en

GSimon 9y ago

I never knew about ProTube, but since YouTube disabled playing videos in background even on Safari/Chrome it's been very annoying. I used to love listening to long format shows/audio in the background. It's still possible, albeit likely not as good as the ProTube app seemed to be, you just have to load up Youtube and request for the desktop site. The site switches from mobile to desktop and becomes a real pain to use but hey I can play videos in the background again. It's pretty lame of YouTube to do, especially since I can't even buy the paid service if I wanted to (I live in Canada).

ucaetano 9y ago
> It's pretty lame of YouTube to do, especially since I can't even buy the paid service if I wanted to (I live in Canada). They don't have the license to do so. Streaming audio requires a different license than streaming video.
- GSimon 9y ago
  The feeling was just that they pulled the rug away on another feature and didn't provide a solution. Periscope is brutal for this too, I want to listen with the lock screen on in my pocket but that's not happening..
- roywiggins 9y ago
  YouTube can't stop me minimizing my browser window on the desktop and nobody is accusing them of violating any licenses for failing to prevent me from doing that, so why is mobile different? Just because they have the technical ability to tell the difference?
  - ucaetano 9y ago
    That's not how licensing rights work. Just because you think it is the same, doesn't mean that lawyers will think that.
  - wiredfool 9y ago
    Youtube (in EU at least) has changed recently to make it much harder to play stuff in the background. (use case, full-album audio listening with the screen off) Ads now will interrupt the stream, and it won't continue till it's in the foreground, or there's a click.

naner 9y ago

Wow, if this was any other company this guy would have just been sued. I don't really have a problem with the guy scraping and using other techniques to get around playing ads and other restrictions. But then he turns around and sells it, and then acts like Google is behaving unfairly by shutting him down... what a class act. I find it hard to have any sympathy for this guy.

comstock 9y ago
It would have been better if they were sued. Why should we have Apple policing their ecosystem on Googles behalf?
- ballenf 9y ago
  Because Apple wants to send a message to app creators of original content that Apple has their back. In this case it was Goliath vs. David, but is probably just as often the reverse in terms of parties' sizes.

bitmapbrother 9y ago

I like how this person brags about how successful his app was and how it hit #1 in 10 countries, but neglects to mention how he was continually violating YouTube's terms of service all the while. Here's my favorite part: YouTube wants to sell its $10/month subscription service which offers many features that ProTube also offered for a lower one time price, so they started hunting down 3rd party YouTube apps on the App Store. It's their service so they can charge whatever they want for it because they actually pay the bills to keep the service up and running. What's not okay is for you to sell an app to customers that, you clearly knew, violated YouTube's TOS and was subject to takedown at anytime.

Rjevski 9y ago

Would you mind giving access to the source, so that advanced users can still compile and install their own binary? Happy to pay for it.

deleted 9y ago
[deleted]

dzhiurgis 9y ago

Simple Googling revealed this: https://github.com/pieter/YoutubeDL-iOS https://github.com/pieter/YoutubeDL-iOS Anyone can sideload without mercy of Apple, uses infamous youtube-dl. Might try later tonight. Would love author to open source his code or contribute to above mentioned project.

the_mitsuhiko 9y ago

What's so frustrating about this is that yourube does not even sell red here. I cannot pay for what protube enabled.

rusinov 9y ago
Unless you use VPN, but this could be a pain.

Wofiel 9y ago

Bit of a shame, I understand the reasoning, but I also understand how poor the existing YouTube app is to this day. I'd be happy with ads, I'd be happy with not being able to download videos, I just wanted to get videos from channels I'd subscribed to and multitask with iOS' native PiP and ProTube let me do that.

Sujan 9y ago

"Interesting" faked whois data on the domain: > Registrant Name: Jonas Gessner > Registrant Street: Infinite Loop 1 > Registrant City: Cupertino > Registrant Postal Code: 95014 > Registrant Country: US > Registrant Phone: +14.089961010

dawnerd 9y ago
So not only do they break YouTube tos but they violate icann rules too? Nice. https://www.icann.org/resources/pages/ra-agreement-2009-05-21-en#3.7.7.2 https://www.icann.org/resources/pages/ra-agreement-2009-05-2...

atroll 9y ago

We need an new youtube alternative.