3 ms·
One of my favourite youtube lawyers (also tech literate), Leonard French, did a review of the case yesterday as a livestream if anyone is interested: https://ww
by neom 6y ago
One of my favourite youtube lawyers (also tech literate), Leonard French, did a review of the case yesterday as a livestream if anyone is interested: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=wZITscblMBA https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=wZITscblMBA
- oars 6y agoThank you for sharing, this is the type of content I come to HN for.
- est31 6y agoVery nice, I wondered why he had the dev console open, apparently to show that the HTTP response actually uses the "451 Unavailable For Legal Reasons" status code: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/HTTP_451 https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/HTTP_451
- foerbert 6y agoI was really looking forward to his analysis, however he also fell into the ReadMe trap. AFAIK (and the recent DMCA/youtube-dl repo thing seemed to support) they didn't include any VEVO videos in their readme. Instead it was used as a test case. A substantial portion of his analysis relied on the readme misinformation. It could be taken as marketing material, and there are specific provisions for when the piracy capabilities are used as marketing. However that's not, as far as I know or can tell, actually what happened in this case. I was very interested in hearing how tests would be viewed legally, but he seems to have been working with the wrong information and so never addressed this.