3 ms·

Come off it, the other part of the name is "dl" I use YouTube-dl as much as the next guy for lawful reasons but these HN comments saying it's not for YouTube a

by corobo 6y ago

Come off it, the other part of the name is "dl" I use YouTube-dl as much as the next guy for lawful reasons but these HN comments saying it's not for YouTube and it's not for downloading is silly. It's literally in the name. Please remember that to reverse this YouTube-dl needs to go through a court. Courts are not code that can be tricked by clever wording. If anything you'll be trying to describe what it is to some old grandma who hasn't got a clue what GitHub is never mind convincing them this software isn't for downloading YouTube videos. By all means everyone go on with coming up with clever interpretations of the law but you're just farting into the wind P.s downvoting my comments doesn't change the way the law works either, but if it helps you feel good have at it :)

nybble41 6y ago
> … these HN comments saying it's not for YouTube and it's not for downloading is silly. It's literally in the name. Regardless of the name, the tool supports over a thousand different sites, not just YouTube, and is routinely used for streaming rather than downloading, with no permanent copy saved. If you run "mpv https://youtu.be/WhWc3b3KhnY https://youtu.be/WhWc3b3KhnY" to simply play the Blender Open Movie "Spring" it relies on youtube-dl behind the scenes to stream the video. (Though of course the difference between streaming and downloading is a trivial one; getting the content to the end user's device is the hard part.) YouTube itself is the entity responsible for duplicating and distributing the content, and they have a license to do so, ergo there is no copyright violation here. The most any user of youtube-dl might be liable for, assuming they don't save a permanent copy or further redistribute the data, would be a violation of YouTube's TOS. Which is no concern of the RIAA. To call youtube-dl a "circumvention tool" is laughable; obfuscation of a video's URL is not DRM.
- deleted 6y ago
  [deleted]

by corobo 6y ago

nybble41 6y ago

> … these HN comments saying it's not for YouTube and it's not for downloading is silly. It's literally in the name. Regardless of the name, the tool supports over a thousand different sites, not just YouTube, and is routinely used for streaming rather than downloading, with no permanent copy saved. If you run "mpv https://youtu.be/WhWc3b3KhnY https://youtu.be/WhWc3b3KhnY" to simply play the Blender Open Movie "Spring" it relies on youtube-dl behind the scenes to stream the video. (Though of course the difference between streaming and downloading is a trivial one; getting the content to the end user's device is the hard part.) YouTube itself is the entity responsible for duplicating and distributing the content, and they have a license to do so, ergo there is no copyright violation here. The most any user of youtube-dl might be liable for, assuming they don't save a permanent copy or further redistribute the data, would be a violation of YouTube's TOS. Which is no concern of the RIAA. To call youtube-dl a "circumvention tool" is laughable; obfuscation of a video's URL is not DRM.

deleted 6y ago
[deleted]