5 ms·

Worth noting the MPA already tried doing this to Popcorn Time, a BitTorrent client designed to provide a Netflix-like UX.[1] The Popcorn Time devs put in a coun

Worth noting the MPA already tried doing this to Popcorn Time, a BitTorrent client designed to provide a Netflix-like UX.[1] The Popcorn Time devs put in a counter-notice and the repository was back up a few weeks later when the period for the MPA to respond expired. The same thing will probably happen here because this is not one of the purposes of DMCA takedown letters, period. Even if there are inappropriate test cases or something in the repo, or if they’re correct that youtube-dl bypasses DRM in violation of a different part of the DMCA, it’s still not a valid takedown because GitHub isn’t hosting anything the RIAA/those it represents own the copyright to. The correct way to do this is to go after the lead youtube-dl developer(s) and/or GitHub for facilitating infringement or whatever, but I don’t think RIAA wants to do that because they probably don’t have much/any legitimate grounds for legal claims against them, so they abuse the DMCA to look like they’re doing something. Edit: for a more concrete picture of what happens next, read GitHub’s DMCA policy.[2] Basically youtube-dl can file a counter notice assuming they disagree with the claims, after that the RIAA has 10-14 days to get a court order or the repo goes back up. [1] https://torrentfreak.com/github-reinstates-popcorn-time-code-despite-mpa-threat-200520/ https://torrentfreak.com/github-reinstates-popcorn-time-code... [2] https://docs.github.com/en/free-pro-team@latest/github/site-policy/dmca-takedown-policy https://docs.github.com/en/free-pro-team@latest/github/site-...

quotemstr 6y ago
It's interesting how many Github counternotices (e.g., [1] [2]) seem completely justified yet link to repositories that are no longer on GitHub. I wonder what happened. [1] in https://github.com/github/dmca/blob/master/2020/05/2020-05-06-quizizz-hack-counternotice.md https://github.com/github/dmca/blob/master/2020/05/2020-05-0... someone forked a permissively-licensed project; the original author made the project-closed source, then issued a DMCA takedown against the fork. That's clearly bogus: you can't revoke an open source license. [2] in https://github.com/github/dmca/blob/master/2019/11/2019-11-25-msft.md https://github.com/github/dmca/blob/master/2019/11/2019-11-2... Microsoft DMCAd a project that did something with Windows local licensing keys. I can see how Microsoft would prefer that this project not exist, but I see no infringement. Not everything that a big company dislikes is an infringement of copyright.
- judge2020 6y ago
  Jetbrains is also constantly taking down cracks/piracy license servers/etc - see [0,1,2]. 0: https://github.com/github/dmca/blob/master/2020/10/2020-10-06-JetBrains.md https://github.com/github/dmca/blob/master/2020/10/2020-10-0... 1: https://github.com/github/dmca/blob/master/2020/01/2020-01-16-jetbrains.md https://github.com/github/dmca/blob/master/2020/01/2020-01-1... 2: https://github.com/github/dmca/blob/master/2019/09/2019-09-03-Jetbrains.md https://github.com/github/dmca/blob/master/2019/09/2019-09-0...
  - junon 6y ago
    WTF this isn't copyright infringement. This is breach of TOS, technically. They have no grounds to use DMCA takedowns for this. How in the world is Github allowing this?
    - resfirestar 6y ago
      DMCA doesn’t give the service provider much room to adjudicate these claims. The intended way to correct bogus DMCA notices is a counter notice. GitHub’s particular policy says they reinstate content 10-14 days after getting a counter notice, unless the claimant gets a restraining order: https://docs.github.com/en/free-pro-team@latest/github/site-policy/dmca-takedown-policy https://docs.github.com/en/free-pro-team@latest/github/site-...
    - Griffinsauce 6y ago
      DMCA! jazz hands Github basically has no choice here, they must take it down immediately and then they or the creator has to fight to get it back up. The law is set up for DOS attacks.
      - nitrogen 6y ago
        One of the earlier worries about the DMCA takedown process was that it would be used fraudulently to take down important things right before an election, or during a breaking news window to bury a story. I wonder if anyone has tried that yet.
blazespin 6y ago
I just used windows-g to record upside down music video. Seems to work fine. mp4 file is in my captures video. Sound is great. How is that acceptable and this isn't? btw, Popcorn time is a bit different situation. I would say bit torrent is more the problem, or at least the people who upload pirated content. What is odd though is that it's the RIAA filing suit here and not google. Google has a real complaint, RIAA certainly does not. It would be like if NYT went after a web client for saving news articles for offline reading. Bizarre.
- Wowfunhappy 6y ago
  Can you use the DMCA for a TOS breech? It's not obvious to me that Google would have a claim.
  - sudosysgen 6y ago
    TOS don't really have any legal power, and you don't even have to accept TOS to use youtube-dl, so I guess the worst they could do would be to deny you service.
- resfirestar 6y ago
  What’s the difference? The main one I can see is that the RIAA is accusing ytdl of being a DRM circumvention tool while Popcorn Time is just a straightforward P2P infringement tool. That doesn’t make the DMCA notice any more valid. I guess I’m nitpicking but it’s important that they’re not “filing suit”, possibly because they don’t care enough or don’t think they have a case. DMCA takedown is a sort of dispute resolution process mandated by law, it’s not a substitute for an actual lawsuit.
- nexuist 6y ago
  > How is that acceptable and this isn't? Because Microsoft can afford lawyers to fight this, and random GitHub projects can't. It's an intimidation tactic.
  - Griffinsauce 6y ago
ls612 6y ago
Well I for one hope you are correct. The fact that popcorn time is still up gives me hope that ytdl will also return soon.
ebg13 6y ago
Is there any chance that someone could sue them for filing illegitimate claims?
- aww_dang 6y ago
  Yes, but it is more difficult than just spamming DMCA takedown requests. I was told I need to prove "tortuous business interference".
  - kordlessagain 6y ago
    Tortious Interference with Contract To prove tortious interference with a contract, a plaintiff must establish several elements, including that The defendant’s conduct led to a breach of the contract; and The plaintiff suffered damage as a result. The question would be whether Github users suffered a breach of contract for having any of our repos potentially shut down for a reason that involves a third party's claims of violation of DMCA.
    - aww_dang 6y ago
      As I recall, there was also an element where the DMCA claimant was protected if they could reasonably believe within good faith that their takedown was valid. There's also unseen elements at play. If you're publishing semi-anonymously, the counter-claim process can deanonymize you. Republishing the same content at a slightly different URL is the obvious, cheapest solution. Very few people have been able to claim damages from false DMCA takedowns, although the DMCA specifically allows for it.
zucker42 6y ago
They probably can't go after Github because part of the purpose of DMCA takedowns is that companies which honor takedowns avoid liability for copyright infringement.

quotemstr 6y ago

It's interesting how many Github counternotices (e.g., [1] [2]) seem completely justified yet link to repositories that are no longer on GitHub. I wonder what happened. [1] in https://github.com/github/dmca/blob/master/2020/05/2020-05-06-quizizz-hack-counternotice.md https://github.com/github/dmca/blob/master/2020/05/2020-05-0... someone forked a permissively-licensed project; the original author made the project-closed source, then issued a DMCA takedown against the fork. That's clearly bogus: you can't revoke an open source license. [2] in https://github.com/github/dmca/blob/master/2019/11/2019-11-25-msft.md https://github.com/github/dmca/blob/master/2019/11/2019-11-2... Microsoft DMCAd a project that did something with Windows local licensing keys. I can see how Microsoft would prefer that this project not exist, but I see no infringement. Not everything that a big company dislikes is an infringement of copyright.

judge2020 6y ago
Jetbrains is also constantly taking down cracks/piracy license servers/etc - see [0,1,2]. 0: https://github.com/github/dmca/blob/master/2020/10/2020-10-06-JetBrains.md https://github.com/github/dmca/blob/master/2020/10/2020-10-0... 1: https://github.com/github/dmca/blob/master/2020/01/2020-01-16-jetbrains.md https://github.com/github/dmca/blob/master/2020/01/2020-01-1... 2: https://github.com/github/dmca/blob/master/2019/09/2019-09-03-Jetbrains.md https://github.com/github/dmca/blob/master/2019/09/2019-09-0...
- junon 6y ago
  WTF this isn't copyright infringement. This is breach of TOS, technically. They have no grounds to use DMCA takedowns for this. How in the world is Github allowing this?
  - resfirestar 6y ago
    DMCA doesn’t give the service provider much room to adjudicate these claims. The intended way to correct bogus DMCA notices is a counter notice. GitHub’s particular policy says they reinstate content 10-14 days after getting a counter notice, unless the claimant gets a restraining order: https://docs.github.com/en/free-pro-team@latest/github/site-policy/dmca-takedown-policy https://docs.github.com/en/free-pro-team@latest/github/site-...
  - Griffinsauce 6y ago
    DMCA! jazz hands Github basically has no choice here, they must take it down immediately and then they or the creator has to fight to get it back up. The law is set up for DOS attacks.
    - nitrogen 6y ago
      One of the earlier worries about the DMCA takedown process was that it would be used fraudulently to take down important things right before an election, or during a breaking news window to bury a story. I wonder if anyone has tried that yet.

blazespin 6y ago

I just used windows-g to record upside down music video. Seems to work fine. mp4 file is in my captures video. Sound is great. How is that acceptable and this isn't? btw, Popcorn time is a bit different situation. I would say bit torrent is more the problem, or at least the people who upload pirated content. What is odd though is that it's the RIAA filing suit here and not google. Google has a real complaint, RIAA certainly does not. It would be like if NYT went after a web client for saving news articles for offline reading. Bizarre.

Wowfunhappy 6y ago
Can you use the DMCA for a TOS breech? It's not obvious to me that Google would have a claim.
- sudosysgen 6y ago
  TOS don't really have any legal power, and you don't even have to accept TOS to use youtube-dl, so I guess the worst they could do would be to deny you service.
resfirestar 6y ago
What’s the difference? The main one I can see is that the RIAA is accusing ytdl of being a DRM circumvention tool while Popcorn Time is just a straightforward P2P infringement tool. That doesn’t make the DMCA notice any more valid. I guess I’m nitpicking but it’s important that they’re not “filing suit”, possibly because they don’t care enough or don’t think they have a case. DMCA takedown is a sort of dispute resolution process mandated by law, it’s not a substitute for an actual lawsuit.
nexuist 6y ago
> How is that acceptable and this isn't? Because Microsoft can afford lawyers to fight this, and random GitHub projects can't. It's an intimidation tactic.
- Griffinsauce 6y ago

ls612 6y ago

Well I for one hope you are correct. The fact that popcorn time is still up gives me hope that ytdl will also return soon.

ebg13 6y ago

Is there any chance that someone could sue them for filing illegitimate claims?

aww_dang 6y ago
Yes, but it is more difficult than just spamming DMCA takedown requests. I was told I need to prove "tortuous business interference".
- kordlessagain 6y ago
  Tortious Interference with Contract To prove tortious interference with a contract, a plaintiff must establish several elements, including that The defendant’s conduct led to a breach of the contract; and The plaintiff suffered damage as a result. The question would be whether Github users suffered a breach of contract for having any of our repos potentially shut down for a reason that involves a third party's claims of violation of DMCA.
  - aww_dang 6y ago
    As I recall, there was also an element where the DMCA claimant was protected if they could reasonably believe within good faith that their takedown was valid. There's also unseen elements at play. If you're publishing semi-anonymously, the counter-claim process can deanonymize you. Republishing the same content at a slightly different URL is the obvious, cheapest solution. Very few people have been able to claim damages from false DMCA takedowns, although the DMCA specifically allows for it.

zucker42 6y ago

They probably can't go after Github because part of the purpose of DMCA takedowns is that companies which honor takedowns avoid liability for copyright infringement.