4 ms·

But what is being circumvented? As far as I'm aware there are no controls put in place that are being circumvented. Edit: I'm also curious why the riaa would h

But what is being circumvented? As far as I'm aware there are no controls put in place that are being circumvented. Edit: I'm also curious why the riaa would have standing at all? Even assuming there is some protection being circumvented, it's not the riaa's control that is being circumvented.

eli 6y ago
Saving videos
- thesimon 6y ago
  Although the OS might do that as well when you watch a video and put the computer into hibernation mode.
- jimktrains2 6y ago
  Youtube-dl doesn't do anything your browser doesn't do already do when accessing said video. Also, I asked what is being circumvented, not what the tool does.
  - can16358p 6y ago
    It boils down to the intention. The intention is to download videos to your computer (as viewable mp4 files for end users) which isn't legal, as they are intended to be streamed (or possibly removed in the future) with ads, stats, analytics, recommended etc. I definitely don't defend this and I know that this whole copyright and DRM thing is fundamentally flawed by design, but it unfortunately works this way legally.
    - jimktrains2 6y ago
      If it boils down to user intention then you can't also argue the tool is circumventing anything. Either mimicking a browser and working the way google expects any client not written or authorized by them, such as a web browser, to is ok or it's not.
- Reelin 6y ago
  I don't think saving things is in general a copyright violation? Knowingly and intentionally obtaining unlicensed content is a violation. Unauthorized redistribution is a violation. Saving and copying things isn't (AFAIK) a violation.
  - Mindwipe 6y ago
    Saving things is creating an unauthorized copy, which is fundamentally the basis of copyright. Some territories have explicit allowances for personal copies but many don't.
    - jimktrains2 6y ago
      There are a variety of reasons that you can have a copy of a copyrighted work it a way the copyright holder didn't intend, such as time shifting or media shifting.
      - Mindwipe 6y ago
        And in many juristictions they are explicitly defined, and don't apply to copyrighted work generally, only when acquired under specific circumstances. Format shifting is explicitly illegal in the UK for example, and timeshifting is restricted to works obtained from a broadcast source by the person performing the copy, and not to an on-demand one, in many territories.
saddlerustle 6y ago
A german court ruled youtube's obfuscation of video request signatures is an effective technological protection measure. YoutubeIE._decrypt_signature in youtube_dl/extractor/youtube.py bypasses this.
- jimktrains2 6y ago
  As a philosophical issue, since the youtube-dl code is running the cipher off of the code provided by youtube, just as my browser is, why is my browser not similarly circumventing this protection? At least with CSS a key needed to be found by means separate from actually watching the DVD and wasn't shipped with the user in the same package as the video itself.
  - ldarby 6y ago
    > why is my browser not similarly circumventing this protection? Because your browser also runs the javascript that displays the ads (unless you've also blocked them, which I think could also be considered a "circumvention measure", IANAL).
    - jimktrains2 6y ago
      If ads we're required, they could certainly not stream a video until the ads have been watched (or at least downloaded and the correct amount of time has passed), they could also insert ads as segments of video without having to transcode all videos for every user, but they don't.
      - anticensor 6y ago
        > they could also insert ads as segments of video without having to transcode all videos for every user That would work in a livestream very well, but not in a video. Imagine everyone getting adverts in the voice of live streamer in the different times of the livestream, and live chat getting time-dilated to compensate, without the streamer itself noticing.
    - 6y ago

eli 6y ago

Saving videos

thesimon 6y ago
Although the OS might do that as well when you watch a video and put the computer into hibernation mode.
jimktrains2 6y ago
Youtube-dl doesn't do anything your browser doesn't do already do when accessing said video. Also, I asked what is being circumvented, not what the tool does.
- can16358p 6y ago
  It boils down to the intention. The intention is to download videos to your computer (as viewable mp4 files for end users) which isn't legal, as they are intended to be streamed (or possibly removed in the future) with ads, stats, analytics, recommended etc. I definitely don't defend this and I know that this whole copyright and DRM thing is fundamentally flawed by design, but it unfortunately works this way legally.
  - jimktrains2 6y ago
    If it boils down to user intention then you can't also argue the tool is circumventing anything. Either mimicking a browser and working the way google expects any client not written or authorized by them, such as a web browser, to is ok or it's not.
Reelin 6y ago
I don't think saving things is in general a copyright violation? Knowingly and intentionally obtaining unlicensed content is a violation. Unauthorized redistribution is a violation. Saving and copying things isn't (AFAIK) a violation.
- Mindwipe 6y ago
  Saving things is creating an unauthorized copy, which is fundamentally the basis of copyright. Some territories have explicit allowances for personal copies but many don't.
  - jimktrains2 6y ago
    There are a variety of reasons that you can have a copy of a copyrighted work it a way the copyright holder didn't intend, such as time shifting or media shifting.
    - Mindwipe 6y ago
      And in many juristictions they are explicitly defined, and don't apply to copyrighted work generally, only when acquired under specific circumstances. Format shifting is explicitly illegal in the UK for example, and timeshifting is restricted to works obtained from a broadcast source by the person performing the copy, and not to an on-demand one, in many territories.

saddlerustle 6y ago

A german court ruled youtube's obfuscation of video request signatures is an effective technological protection measure. YoutubeIE._decrypt_signature in youtube_dl/extractor/youtube.py bypasses this.

jimktrains2 6y ago
As a philosophical issue, since the youtube-dl code is running the cipher off of the code provided by youtube, just as my browser is, why is my browser not similarly circumventing this protection? At least with CSS a key needed to be found by means separate from actually watching the DVD and wasn't shipped with the user in the same package as the video itself.
- ldarby 6y ago
  > why is my browser not similarly circumventing this protection? Because your browser also runs the javascript that displays the ads (unless you've also blocked them, which I think could also be considered a "circumvention measure", IANAL).
  - jimktrains2 6y ago
    If ads we're required, they could certainly not stream a video until the ads have been watched (or at least downloaded and the correct amount of time has passed), they could also insert ads as segments of video without having to transcode all videos for every user, but they don't.
    - anticensor 6y ago
      > they could also insert ads as segments of video without having to transcode all videos for every user That would work in a livestream very well, but not in a video. Imagine everyone getting adverts in the voice of live streamer in the different times of the livestream, and live chat getting time-dilated to compensate, without the streamer itself noticing.
  - 6y ago