6 ms·

YouTube uses encrypted signatures as a way of hiding the URL of the video. https://github.com/l1ving/youtube-dl/blob/master/youtube_dl/extractor/youtube.py#L12

by eznzt 6y ago

YouTube uses encrypted signatures as a way of hiding the URL of the video. https://github.com/l1ving/youtube-dl/blob/master/youtube_dl/extractor/youtube.py#L1205-L1337 https://github.com/l1ving/youtube-dl/blob/master/youtube_dl/...

rwmj 6y ago
That downloads and runs a web page, the same as your browser does when it visits youtube.com.
ttt0 6y ago
Hey, what's that? https://github.com/l1ving/youtube-dl/blob/master/youtube_dl/extractor/youtube.py#L1301 https://github.com/l1ving/youtube-dl/blob/master/youtube_dl/... So if you open devtools in your web browser and go to the Network tab, where you can manually download all audio and video files -- congratulations, your browser just circumvented protection measures, because it interpreted some javascript. I guess we have to take down browsers too now. This is completely retarded.
0x008 6y ago
I love how that last line of the highlight is line 1337.
Rochus 6y ago
It's like closing the door and hanging the key next to the door for all to see. Definitely not an effective technical measure to protect the house. EDIT: And not to forget that Youtube hosts many CC-BY licensed videos which explicitly allow unlimited use (incl. decryption if necessary), and that Youtube has contracts with copyright collectives in most countries so for any user it is save to assume that the video is legally uploaded (and thus download and store for personal use is legal in most countries).
- Mindwipe 6y ago
  > (and thus download and store for personal use is legal in most countries). That's a highly questionable statement. Certainly, most European countries do not have such a law in all circumstances, and it's dependent on if the personal use copy is made of an asset you are licensed to have permanent access to (which you aren't of a collectively licensed work) or a broadcast for timeshifted purpose (which an on-demand asset isn't).
  - Rochus 6y ago
    > if the personal use copy is made of an asset you are licensed to have permanent access to Apparently you're in a Common Law country. In European countries making a copy for personal use is generally legal, unless the user should have been aware that the content was uploaded illegally; in the case of Youtube, the user may generally assume that the content has been uploaded legally, because Youtube has concluded contracts with most copyright collectives and the compensation is made in the form of a flat-rate surcharge on all storage media. In Switzerland you may even legally download illegal content for personal use and also circumvent a copy protection for the purpose of creating a personal copy. EDIT: and did I mention that I studied law in Switzerland?
  - BlueTemplar 6y ago
    YouTube makes these videos freely available. Downloading them is completely legal. (So is videotaping them with an external camera, or anything in-between.)
- gamblor956 6y ago
  The DMCA does not require the technical measure to be highly effective, or even that it be effective at all. It simply requires that a technical measure of some sort exists. Thus, it doesn't matter that it's hanging the key next to the door; it is sufficient for the purposes of the DMCA that there is a closed door.
  - Rochus 6y ago
    https://www.law.cornell.edu/uscode/text/17/1201 https://www.law.cornell.edu/uscode/text/17/1201 (a)(1)(A): No person shall circumvent a technological measure that effectively controls access to a work protected under this title. What you propose would lead to complete arbitrariness.
    - gamblor956 6y ago
      No, because in the U.S. we have this thing called "reasonableness." Obfuscating the cache file effectively controls the work by preventing most viewers from making a permanent copy. It takes technical knowledge to overcome that measure. (Go ahead, ask any non-techie you know to download a copy of a video from Youtube without using a tool like youtube-dl. They'll fail.) That's a reasonable measure; it would prevent the overwhelming majority of the population from copying. It doesn't matter that it wouldn't protect against the entire population; in the real world, keys, safes, bike locks, etc. don't stop determined individuals either. And the outcome, if youtube-dl wins this case? Youtube and other sites that feature substantial amount of copyrighted content will have to change the technical details of how they store temporary video content, ultimately rendering youtube-dl useless for all videos, not just the ones guarded by the RIAA. Win the battle, lose the war.
      - ttt0 6y ago
        > It takes technical knowledge to overcome that measure. (Go ahead, ask any non-techie you know to download a copy of a video from Youtube without using a tool like youtube-dl. They'll fail.) Go to the Taylor Swift music video, open devtools, go to the Network tab and you can download everything from there. The only caveat is that you have to manually merge audio and video files, and youtube-dl does this for you. Other than that, youtube-dl does basically the same thing.

by eznzt 6y ago

rwmj 6y ago

That downloads and runs a web page, the same as your browser does when it visits youtube.com.

ttt0 6y ago

Hey, what's that? https://github.com/l1ving/youtube-dl/blob/master/youtube_dl/extractor/youtube.py#L1301 https://github.com/l1ving/youtube-dl/blob/master/youtube_dl/... So if you open devtools in your web browser and go to the Network tab, where you can manually download all audio and video files -- congratulations, your browser just circumvented protection measures, because it interpreted some javascript. I guess we have to take down browsers too now. This is completely retarded.

0x008 6y ago

I love how that last line of the highlight is line 1337.

Rochus 6y ago

It's like closing the door and hanging the key next to the door for all to see. Definitely not an effective technical measure to protect the house. EDIT: And not to forget that Youtube hosts many CC-BY licensed videos which explicitly allow unlimited use (incl. decryption if necessary), and that Youtube has contracts with copyright collectives in most countries so for any user it is save to assume that the video is legally uploaded (and thus download and store for personal use is legal in most countries).

Mindwipe 6y ago
> (and thus download and store for personal use is legal in most countries). That's a highly questionable statement. Certainly, most European countries do not have such a law in all circumstances, and it's dependent on if the personal use copy is made of an asset you are licensed to have permanent access to (which you aren't of a collectively licensed work) or a broadcast for timeshifted purpose (which an on-demand asset isn't).
- Rochus 6y ago
  > if the personal use copy is made of an asset you are licensed to have permanent access to Apparently you're in a Common Law country. In European countries making a copy for personal use is generally legal, unless the user should have been aware that the content was uploaded illegally; in the case of Youtube, the user may generally assume that the content has been uploaded legally, because Youtube has concluded contracts with most copyright collectives and the compensation is made in the form of a flat-rate surcharge on all storage media. In Switzerland you may even legally download illegal content for personal use and also circumvent a copy protection for the purpose of creating a personal copy. EDIT: and did I mention that I studied law in Switzerland?
- BlueTemplar 6y ago
  YouTube makes these videos freely available. Downloading them is completely legal. (So is videotaping them with an external camera, or anything in-between.)
gamblor956 6y ago
The DMCA does not require the technical measure to be highly effective, or even that it be effective at all. It simply requires that a technical measure of some sort exists. Thus, it doesn't matter that it's hanging the key next to the door; it is sufficient for the purposes of the DMCA that there is a closed door.
- Rochus 6y ago
  https://www.law.cornell.edu/uscode/text/17/1201 https://www.law.cornell.edu/uscode/text/17/1201 (a)(1)(A): No person shall circumvent a technological measure that effectively controls access to a work protected under this title. What you propose would lead to complete arbitrariness.
  - gamblor956 6y ago
    No, because in the U.S. we have this thing called "reasonableness." Obfuscating the cache file effectively controls the work by preventing most viewers from making a permanent copy. It takes technical knowledge to overcome that measure. (Go ahead, ask any non-techie you know to download a copy of a video from Youtube without using a tool like youtube-dl. They'll fail.) That's a reasonable measure; it would prevent the overwhelming majority of the population from copying. It doesn't matter that it wouldn't protect against the entire population; in the real world, keys, safes, bike locks, etc. don't stop determined individuals either. And the outcome, if youtube-dl wins this case? Youtube and other sites that feature substantial amount of copyrighted content will have to change the technical details of how they store temporary video content, ultimately rendering youtube-dl useless for all videos, not just the ones guarded by the RIAA. Win the battle, lose the war.
    - ttt0 6y ago
      > It takes technical knowledge to overcome that measure. (Go ahead, ask any non-techie you know to download a copy of a video from Youtube without using a tool like youtube-dl. They'll fail.) Go to the Taylor Swift music video, open devtools, go to the Network tab and you can download everything from there. The only caveat is that you have to manually merge audio and video files, and youtube-dl does this for you. Other than that, youtube-dl does basically the same thing.