8 ms·

Also, does the fact that YouTube doesn't supply a download feature constitute a "technical protection measure"? From the RIAA's point of view, it works to thei

Also, does the fact that YouTube doesn't supply a download feature constitute a "technical protection measure"? From the RIAA's point of view, it works to their benefit that a download link doesn't exist, and it may be something they like, but that doesn't mean that's why. It could just as easily be that a download feature doesn't exist because YouTube wants you to keep returning to their site if you want to rewatch a video. It would be one thing if some YouTube videos had a download button and others didn't. That would suggest that, on the ones where it's missing, it is missing for a reason, and that reason might be DRM. But as far as I know, YouTube doesn't have download for any videos. Software doesn't always have all the features that end users might want, and the mere absence of a feature doesn't necessarily tell you why it's missing. Also, it's not some weird, suspicious thing to write software which fills in a feature gap in some other software. (Google encourages add-on software on other products, too. For example, Chrome extensions and Gmail add-ons.) But, maybe there is some legal reason why this could make sense. Maybe some terms of service or licensing (for video uploaders or for regular end users) says not to download something, which would make it clear that the download feature is missing on purpose.

mig39 6y ago
Youtube does have a "download" feature in YouTube studio. Where you can download a heavily compressed version of any video you've uploaded. But only videos you've uploaded.
- vongomben 6y ago
  IANAL IANAT yet the video I am watching isn't being stored in my browser?
  - adrianmonk 6y ago
    The data obviously must make it to your computer. A distinction that can be made is whether it is possible/easy to use it separately, outside of YouTube.
    - boomboomsubban 6y ago
      They come as regular media files, the chunking would cause issues for most people but it's easy to view. I don't think difficulty is what is important though, what matters is if they were to need some kind of decrypter from the copyright holder.
warp 6y ago
There is a "Download" button in the mobile Youtube apps (if you're paying for Youtube Premium).
- grishka 6y ago
  Except it doesn't give you the actual file, it's still only playable offline through the app (unless you have root I guess).
  - slaymaker1907 6y ago
    I have YT premium and an android phone so I checked this out. It looks like they don't store a single mp4 or anything and instead store it in chunks. I am not sure though if they are actually encrypted and stored using some sort of copy protection or if you could assemble the pieces into a single video using some algorithm without a special key.
    - pushrax 6y ago
      I would guess it’s similar to the chunking they do when streaming in the first place. Assembling the pieces is one of the main functions of youtube-dl.
eznzt 6y ago
>Also, does the fact that YouTube doesn't supply a download feature constitute a "technical protection measure"? Yes, they have some sort of DRM, albeit a very weak one.
- adrianmonk 6y ago
  Hmm, so maybe it's legally enough if YouTube does have a protection mechanism and the material is copyrighted, even if the protection mechanism isn't necessarily intended to protect copyright?
- SahAssar 6y ago
  Last I checked normal youtube videos are just a MPEG-DASH/HLS stream, with no DRM. What youtube-dl essentially does is reading the playlist and concatenating chunks together, there is no DRM circumvention here.
  - eznzt 6y ago
    Sure, but the URL that needs to be requested is encrypted even if the stream itself is not.
    - sudosysgen 6y ago
      The embeded js that YouTube provides gives your browser the link in clear.
    - SahAssar 6y ago
      It's no more encrypted than any other https resource. What is the argument you are trying to make?
      - eznzt 6y ago
        My argument is that the URL address for the HLS stream you access is not in clear text in the html code youtube sends you. Javascript code is executed to decode it (which changes constantly, hence the need for youtube-dl to be updated constantly) and that is a form of DRM which youtube-dl breaks.
williamscales 6y ago
You are able to download YouTube videos on your phone, if you subscribe to YouTube premium. I haven’t made any deep investigation of this but I kinda assume the videos are protected by DRM.
freshhawk 6y ago
> Also, does the fact that YouTube doesn't supply a download feature constitute a "technical protection measure"? My understanding is that basically anything at all, if it is in any way "technical" and shows intent, will be accepted as a "technical protection measure" if you go by what has worked so far. Much more absurd and blatantly bad faith arguments have been accepted, "conspicuously not supplying the feature" is a very strong case in the absurd world of the DMCA cases.
- Spivak 6y ago
  I mean it has to be that way because it would be silly to lose copyright protection just because you have crappy security.
  - amluto 6y ago
    Whoa there. The DMCA is not “copyright protection”. The DMCA is a bunch of additional obnoxious protections on top of copyright.
  - suyjuris 6y ago
    That is not the argument, though. Your copyright is protected regardless of the strength of your security measures. But it is also, separately, illegal to circumvent these measures. This latter prohibition becomes more far-reaching and has more collateral damage the weaker the security measures it applies to, which is worrying. Outlawing the methods of committing a crime also (instead of just the crime) requires a balancing act between their legitimate and illegitimate uses, which seems precariously absent when talking about technically laughable “security measures” that can be circumvented by pressing F12.
  - freshhawk 6y ago
    But the trick is to put a crap lock around both something that can be copyrighted but is unimportant and things that cannot be copyrighted. Now all legal uses of everything behind that lock are illegal for circumvention reasons. It's a way to apply the DMCA to literally anything digital. The quality of the software doesn't matter, because it isn't for security, just a legal hack.
intricatedetail 6y ago
The fact that youtube wants people to come back to the site and use servers, miles of wires, electricity, network machinery instead of letting them download videos so they can watch them from thumbdrive just says to me this company is unethical and harms environment. Any business model that forces people to be on the network without any reason other than greed, should be illegal. If you can stream the file, download option should be mandatory by law.
- stormbeard 6y ago
  People forget that Youtube is a _business_. The reason they maintain all of those servers and network machinery is to serve ads, otherwise why would they provide that service for free?
  - intricatedetail 6y ago
    No. But they shouldn't harm environment. If business is harmful then should be illegal.
    - siegfried-en 6y ago
      Well that's a pretty simplistic view.
      - justinclift 6y ago
        That doesn't mean there isn't some truth to it. ;)
    - mcrad 6y ago
      How is it possible to legislate electricity caps on google, according to some imagined threshold of "harm to environment"? Sounds like the number of lawyers involved would be the real harm in this scenario.
      - intricatedetail 6y ago
slaymaker1907 6y ago
The button doesn't exist, but apparently they do have a link that lets you download the video, it is just obfuscated. <https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=24874277 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=24874277>
madeofpalk 6y ago
> It could just as easily be that a download feature doesn't exist because YouTube wants you to keep returning to their site if you want to rewatch a video. Lets be clear though - the only reason copyrighted material is allowed on Youtube is because the owners then grant a license for the content in exchange for ad revenue. Offering a download link severly damages the "owners are paid for their content" part of the equation.
- johnsonjo 6y ago
  This is true and still applies in the case where you pay for YouTube Premium. Even if you use YouTube Premium you are also helping pay the content creators [1] > # How YouTube Premium supports creators. > Creators are the heart and soul of YouTube. To make sure they're compensated for their work, we share ad revenue with them when you watch ads on YouTube. If you're a YouTube Premium member, you won't see ads, so we share your monthly membership fee with creators. Best of all, the more videos you watch from your favorite creators, the more money they make. So, to reply to the gp you technically aren’t just paying “evil” and “greedy” big corps, but your also helping all the YouTubers. [1]: https://support.google.com/youtube/answer/7060016?hl=en https://support.google.com/youtube/answer/7060016?hl=en
saddlerustle 6y ago
As mentioned in the notice, the RIAA is specifically claiming youtube-dl's deobfuscation of youtube's request signatures is what's infringing, which a german court ruled to be an effective technological protection measure.
- heyoni 6y ago
  I seriously doubt they read the source code.
merb 6y ago
> Also, does the fact that YouTube doesn't supply a download feature constitute a "technical protection measure"? an actual court in germany ruled that: https://openjur.de/u/2194436.html https://openjur.de/u/2194436.html sadly german only. lots of fud and hamburg is often pro copyright owner. not sure if that would hold at the highest instance.
- hekdev 6y ago
  The decisions of a German court would have no impact on a US court.
zucker42 6y ago
> Also, does the fact that YouTube doesn't supply a download feature constitute a "technical protection measure"? The law is so vague on this point so as to include practically anything. Here is the text: > a technological measure “effectively controls access to a work” if the measure, in the ordinary course of its operation, requires the application of information, or a process or a treatment, with the authority of the copyright owner, to gain access to the work.

mig39 6y ago

Youtube does have a "download" feature in YouTube studio. Where you can download a heavily compressed version of any video you've uploaded. But only videos you've uploaded.

vongomben 6y ago
IANAL IANAT yet the video I am watching isn't being stored in my browser?
- adrianmonk 6y ago
  The data obviously must make it to your computer. A distinction that can be made is whether it is possible/easy to use it separately, outside of YouTube.
  - boomboomsubban 6y ago
    They come as regular media files, the chunking would cause issues for most people but it's easy to view. I don't think difficulty is what is important though, what matters is if they were to need some kind of decrypter from the copyright holder.

warp 6y ago

There is a "Download" button in the mobile Youtube apps (if you're paying for Youtube Premium).

grishka 6y ago
Except it doesn't give you the actual file, it's still only playable offline through the app (unless you have root I guess).
- slaymaker1907 6y ago
  I have YT premium and an android phone so I checked this out. It looks like they don't store a single mp4 or anything and instead store it in chunks. I am not sure though if they are actually encrypted and stored using some sort of copy protection or if you could assemble the pieces into a single video using some algorithm without a special key.
  - pushrax 6y ago
    I would guess it’s similar to the chunking they do when streaming in the first place. Assembling the pieces is one of the main functions of youtube-dl.

eznzt 6y ago

>Also, does the fact that YouTube doesn't supply a download feature constitute a "technical protection measure"? Yes, they have some sort of DRM, albeit a very weak one.

adrianmonk 6y ago
Hmm, so maybe it's legally enough if YouTube does have a protection mechanism and the material is copyrighted, even if the protection mechanism isn't necessarily intended to protect copyright?
SahAssar 6y ago
Last I checked normal youtube videos are just a MPEG-DASH/HLS stream, with no DRM. What youtube-dl essentially does is reading the playlist and concatenating chunks together, there is no DRM circumvention here.
- eznzt 6y ago
  Sure, but the URL that needs to be requested is encrypted even if the stream itself is not.
  - sudosysgen 6y ago
    The embeded js that YouTube provides gives your browser the link in clear.
  - SahAssar 6y ago
    It's no more encrypted than any other https resource. What is the argument you are trying to make?
    - eznzt 6y ago
      My argument is that the URL address for the HLS stream you access is not in clear text in the html code youtube sends you. Javascript code is executed to decode it (which changes constantly, hence the need for youtube-dl to be updated constantly) and that is a form of DRM which youtube-dl breaks.

williamscales 6y ago

You are able to download YouTube videos on your phone, if you subscribe to YouTube premium. I haven’t made any deep investigation of this but I kinda assume the videos are protected by DRM.

freshhawk 6y ago

> Also, does the fact that YouTube doesn't supply a download feature constitute a "technical protection measure"? My understanding is that basically anything at all, if it is in any way "technical" and shows intent, will be accepted as a "technical protection measure" if you go by what has worked so far. Much more absurd and blatantly bad faith arguments have been accepted, "conspicuously not supplying the feature" is a very strong case in the absurd world of the DMCA cases.

Spivak 6y ago
I mean it has to be that way because it would be silly to lose copyright protection just because you have crappy security.
- amluto 6y ago
  Whoa there. The DMCA is not “copyright protection”. The DMCA is a bunch of additional obnoxious protections on top of copyright.
- suyjuris 6y ago
  That is not the argument, though. Your copyright is protected regardless of the strength of your security measures. But it is also, separately, illegal to circumvent these measures. This latter prohibition becomes more far-reaching and has more collateral damage the weaker the security measures it applies to, which is worrying. Outlawing the methods of committing a crime also (instead of just the crime) requires a balancing act between their legitimate and illegitimate uses, which seems precariously absent when talking about technically laughable “security measures” that can be circumvented by pressing F12.
- freshhawk 6y ago
  But the trick is to put a crap lock around both something that can be copyrighted but is unimportant and things that cannot be copyrighted. Now all legal uses of everything behind that lock are illegal for circumvention reasons. It's a way to apply the DMCA to literally anything digital. The quality of the software doesn't matter, because it isn't for security, just a legal hack.

intricatedetail 6y ago

The fact that youtube wants people to come back to the site and use servers, miles of wires, electricity, network machinery instead of letting them download videos so they can watch them from thumbdrive just says to me this company is unethical and harms environment. Any business model that forces people to be on the network without any reason other than greed, should be illegal. If you can stream the file, download option should be mandatory by law.

stormbeard 6y ago
People forget that Youtube is a _business_. The reason they maintain all of those servers and network machinery is to serve ads, otherwise why would they provide that service for free?
- intricatedetail 6y ago
  No. But they shouldn't harm environment. If business is harmful then should be illegal.
  - siegfried-en 6y ago
    Well that's a pretty simplistic view.
    - justinclift 6y ago
      That doesn't mean there isn't some truth to it. ;)
  - mcrad 6y ago
    How is it possible to legislate electricity caps on google, according to some imagined threshold of "harm to environment"? Sounds like the number of lawyers involved would be the real harm in this scenario.
    - intricatedetail 6y ago

slaymaker1907 6y ago

The button doesn't exist, but apparently they do have a link that lets you download the video, it is just obfuscated. <https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=24874277 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=24874277>

madeofpalk 6y ago

> It could just as easily be that a download feature doesn't exist because YouTube wants you to keep returning to their site if you want to rewatch a video. Lets be clear though - the only reason copyrighted material is allowed on Youtube is because the owners then grant a license for the content in exchange for ad revenue. Offering a download link severly damages the "owners are paid for their content" part of the equation.

johnsonjo 6y ago
This is true and still applies in the case where you pay for YouTube Premium. Even if you use YouTube Premium you are also helping pay the content creators [1] > # How YouTube Premium supports creators. > Creators are the heart and soul of YouTube. To make sure they're compensated for their work, we share ad revenue with them when you watch ads on YouTube. If you're a YouTube Premium member, you won't see ads, so we share your monthly membership fee with creators. Best of all, the more videos you watch from your favorite creators, the more money they make. So, to reply to the gp you technically aren’t just paying “evil” and “greedy” big corps, but your also helping all the YouTubers. [1]: https://support.google.com/youtube/answer/7060016?hl=en https://support.google.com/youtube/answer/7060016?hl=en

saddlerustle 6y ago

As mentioned in the notice, the RIAA is specifically claiming youtube-dl's deobfuscation of youtube's request signatures is what's infringing, which a german court ruled to be an effective technological protection measure.

heyoni 6y ago
I seriously doubt they read the source code.

merb 6y ago

> Also, does the fact that YouTube doesn't supply a download feature constitute a "technical protection measure"? an actual court in germany ruled that: https://openjur.de/u/2194436.html https://openjur.de/u/2194436.html sadly german only. lots of fud and hamburg is often pro copyright owner. not sure if that would hold at the highest instance.

hekdev 6y ago
The decisions of a German court would have no impact on a US court.

zucker42 6y ago

> Also, does the fact that YouTube doesn't supply a download feature constitute a "technical protection measure"? The law is so vague on this point so as to include practically anything. Here is the text: > a technological measure “effectively controls access to a work” if the measure, in the ordinary course of its operation, requires the application of information, or a process or a treatment, with the authority of the copyright owner, to gain access to the work.