4 ms·
What is the misuse here? The DMCA makes it illegal to distribute software whose intention is to circumvent technical measures that prevent access to copyrighted
by Kranar 6y ago
What is the misuse here? The DMCA makes it illegal to distribute software whose intention is to circumvent technical measures that prevent access to copyrighted materials [1]. youtube-dl's own documentation provides instructions on downloading copyrighted music videos and its test suite uses copyrighted material as well. It's pretty hard, although not impossible, to claim that the intention of the software isn't to engage in copyright violations given those two facts.
Okay so you make a counterargument that maybe this qualifies as fair-use or falls under some other exemption. Maybe you're right, maybe you're not right, that's for a court to decide. The RIAA's lawyer is not here to defend youtube-dl's position on the matter, youtube-dl has the responsibility of defending itself and demonstrating why it chose to use copyrighted music videos as the key example and use case.
You can object to the law and you can even provide a defense for youtube-dl and counter the takedown notice, but you can't say that RIAA's lawyer abused the DMCA takedown process by defending its client.
[1] https://www.copyright.gov/policy/1201/#:~:text=Enacted%20in%201998%20as%20part,in%20technology%20or%20services%20that https://www.copyright.gov/policy/1201/#:~:text=Enacted%20in%...
- akersten 6y agoThe misuse of the DMCA takedown notice is that none of the content in the repository was copyright to the RIAA or to an entity the RIAA represents. That's it. The DMCA takedown process is emphatically not the avenue to remedy an alleged circumvention tool as defined by the DMCA. The DMCA allows relief through the courts in that case, a route the RIAA chose not to persue because it is easier to misuse the takedown process. The DMCA takedown process is intended only to remedy the situation where your or your clients' copyrighted content is hosted without permission - any other use is perjury. You can read more about how a claimant must identify the specific infringing content in a takedown notice here [0]. [0]: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Online_Copyright_Infringement_Liability_Limitation_Act#Notice_from_copyright_owner https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Online_Copyright_Infringement_...
- Kranar 6y agoYou are referencing section 512 of the DMCA, but that's not what the RIAA issued to Github. The RIAA issued a notice in reference to section 1201 of the DMCA and Github has a specific complaint process for violations of that section, and I quote "Complaints about Anti-Circumvention Technology" [1]. That was the form that was used to make the complaint to Github. A link to the details of that complaint along with instructions on how to submit a notice for such violations can be found below. So what exactly is Microsoft or Github suing the RIAA for given that it is Github which provides a complaint process for technologies that circumvent section 1201 of the DMCA. [1] https://docs.github.com/en/free-pro-team@latest/github/site-policy/guide-to-submitting-a-dmca-takedown-notice#complaints-about-anti-circumvention-technology https://docs.github.com/en/free-pro-team@latest/github/site-...
- kazinator 6y agoYouTube doesn't have copy protection for downloads; there is nothing to circumvent. These tools just add a user interface for downloading. If you subscribe to Youtube Premium, Youtube itself gives you downloading. This is not like breaking encryption on DVDs. Your device has to download the data in order for the video to be viewed. Streaming is a form of downloading; a copy of the data passes through your equipment, and is retained for some duration of time.
- Kranar 6y agoYes Youtube does have copy protection for downloads and in fact the reason why certain specific music videos were chosen to be part of youtube-dl's test suite is to test the circumvention of Youtube's copy protections! It's literally in the documentation of youtube-dl's test suite what Youtube's mechanisms are along with how to circumvent them.
- deleted 6y ago[deleted]
- wayneftw 6y agoIt doesn’t matter. Chrome and youtube-dl are both downloading a video and letting the user play it. Youtube-dl is nothing more than a specialized browser. If Chrome does something, any other piece of software is allowed to do it.
- Rochus 6y agoDownloading copyrighted music per se is not illegal. This is not the same as intentionally circumventing a digital rights protection mechanism. In some countries (but not in all) it is illegal to download copyrighted music if it was illegally uploaded. But we don't have to assume in the first place that Youtube videos were illegally uploaded. And not to forget that many titles on Youtube are licensed under CC-BY, so in any case they can be legally downloaded and even shared.
- Google234 6y agoYou are braking the TOS by downloading videos from YouTube so it’s not legal.
- mbushey 6y agoYouTube's TOS is not law.
- kazinator 6y agoAlso, Youtube's TOS is not Gihub's TOS, and is not the RIAA's TOS.
- Rochus 6y agoIf this standard form contract is relevant at all (depending on country and other factors), it has nothing to do with copyright. As far as copyright is concerned, see e.g. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sony_Corp._of_America_v._Universal_City_Studios,_Inc https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sony_Corp._of_America_v._Unive....
- smokelegend 6y agoDoesn't YouTube offer a premium service that allows d/l of videos? Youtube red or something I think it's called. What's the difference in using youtube-dl to d/l copyright video or using youtube premium to d/l said copyright video. Note: I have not used youtube res service so idk how it works
- gravypod 6y agoWhat is illegal according to the DMCA is not the same as what is legal to include in a DMCA Takedown Request. This is a specific extralegal process for streamlining disputes over copyright hosted on a third party's platform. It's like if someone is loitering outside of a store the store owner doesn't have the right to arrest them and lock them in a cell in their basement. There's a process that needs to be followed by people. Just because loitering may be illegal, and you have the right to post a no loitering sign, doesn't mean you can enforce that on your own. DMCA Takedowns are an exception that allows parties to quickly remove copywriten material from distribution that comes with heafty penalties (whatever the judge thinks is reasonable) for when something like this goes to court and it's found that the takedown is invalid.
- Kranar 6y agoExcept the RIAA did not issue the specific S512 notice that you, and many other posters are mistakenly referring to. The RIAA sent a notice in reference to S1201 [1] which is specifically about circumvention and which Github explicitly has a section about titled "Complaints about Anti-Circumvention Technology" and linked below [2]. [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... [2] https://docs.github.com/en/free-pro-team@latest/github/site-policy/guide-to-submitting-a-dmca-takedown-notice#complaints-about-anti-circumvention-technology https://docs.github.com/en/free-pro-team@latest/github/site-...]
- dredmorbius 6y agohttps://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=24893533 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=24893533
- dredmorbius 6y agoRIAA's claim against youtube-dl / Microsoft is not a §512 infringement / takedown / safe-harbour act. https://joindiaspora.com/posts/808cf690f8e801381778002590d8e506 https://joindiaspora.com/posts/808cf690f8e801381778002590d8e... HN discussion: https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=24888234 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=24888234