3 ms·
The distribution of youtube-dl itself is what's at issue, not the use of youtube-dl or the distribution of files downloaded with youtube-dl.
by saddlerustle 6y ago
The distribution of youtube-dl itself is what's at issue, not the use of youtube-dl or the distribution of files downloaded with youtube-dl.
- nix23 6y agoAnd why is that not a issue anymore? (hint it was): https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Libdvdcss https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Libdvdcss
- saddlerustle 6y agoThe RIAA is specifically making the allegation that "the source code was designed and is marketed for the purpose of circumventing YouTube’s technological measures to enable unauthorized access to our member’s copyrighted works" [1], justified by the references to copyrighted works in the youtube-dl readme and source code. If it wasn't for that, it'd be much easier to argue that it's designed for non-infringing purposes only (or one of the other exceptions to the DMCA's TPM clauses), like you could plausibly argue for libdvdcss. [1] https://github.com/github/dmca/blob/master/2020/10/2020-10-23-RIAA.md https://github.com/github/dmca/blob/master/2020/10/2020-10-2...
- nix23 6y agoJust read that article: https://joindiaspora.com/posts/808cf690f8e801381778002590d8e506 https://joindiaspora.com/posts/808cf690f8e801381778002590d8e...