3 ms·

This didn't backfire for the RIAA, it backfired for GitHub, who are absolutely not the bad guys in this. They have expressed more support for the project than t

This didn't backfire for the RIAA, it backfired for GitHub, who are absolutely not the bad guys in this. They have expressed more support for the project than they would have needed to and are bound to laws.

tw04 6y ago
In the short-term, no. In the long-term - should companies like Microsoft get sick of their crap, all of the RIAAs power is based in regulatory capture. We can (and should) change the copyright laws that enable them to sue someone over a creative work that quite frankly they shouldn't get a single piece of after an extremely short period of time. The RIAA is big, Microsoft is much, much bigger and could tie them up in courts and outspend them in lobbying without missing a beat. You helped make an album? Great - here's your flat fee, royalties go to the artist and the artist only. The problem would fix itself overnight.
- ddevault 6y ago
  Microsoft is a member of RIAA.
- lovehashbrowns 6y ago
  Setting aside the fact that Microsoft is a member of the RIAA alongside other major companies, the RIAA isn’t the only one interested in lobbying for strict copyright laws. There’s the MPAA, Disney, Viacom, etc. Ask Google how they fared when Viacom tried to sue YouTube into oblivion. :) Hint: Content ID
  - arpa 6y ago
    Google is new money, these fucks are old money. Print establishments are older money. Print doesn't care about piracy. Print has a good academia racket going.
deleted 6y ago
[deleted]
R0b0t1 6y ago
Github's failure is one of principles. That the youtube-dl repository is actually a violation is tenuous at best. Should they actually care about the state of things they would have resisted, but they did not.
- kmeisthax 6y ago
  No, GitHub did everything "right", or at least as right as the law allows. DMCA 1201 is really just that overbroad, and if GitHub hadn't complied with the takedown anyone involved with that decision would literally be put in jail. Unlike normal copyright infringement (which is usually just a shitton of money damages) messing with DRM is a felony, punishable by up to five years in jail. Unless you literally want Microsoft to start committing insurrection against the US government. I'd rather lose youtube-dl than live in a world where tech companies are corporate sovereigns.
  - R0b0t1 6y ago
    Again, no: Github could assert the law is invalid in this context and/or there is no way that youtube-dl can be DMCA'd. It takes principles to do this, and apparently they have none.

tw04 6y ago

In the short-term, no. In the long-term - should companies like Microsoft get sick of their crap, all of the RIAAs power is based in regulatory capture. We can (and should) change the copyright laws that enable them to sue someone over a creative work that quite frankly they shouldn't get a single piece of after an extremely short period of time. The RIAA is big, Microsoft is much, much bigger and could tie them up in courts and outspend them in lobbying without missing a beat. You helped make an album? Great - here's your flat fee, royalties go to the artist and the artist only. The problem would fix itself overnight.

ddevault 6y ago
Microsoft is a member of RIAA.
lovehashbrowns 6y ago
Setting aside the fact that Microsoft is a member of the RIAA alongside other major companies, the RIAA isn’t the only one interested in lobbying for strict copyright laws. There’s the MPAA, Disney, Viacom, etc. Ask Google how they fared when Viacom tried to sue YouTube into oblivion. :) Hint: Content ID
- arpa 6y ago
  Google is new money, these fucks are old money. Print establishments are older money. Print doesn't care about piracy. Print has a good academia racket going.

deleted 6y ago

[deleted]

R0b0t1 6y ago

Github's failure is one of principles. That the youtube-dl repository is actually a violation is tenuous at best. Should they actually care about the state of things they would have resisted, but they did not.

kmeisthax 6y ago
No, GitHub did everything "right", or at least as right as the law allows. DMCA 1201 is really just that overbroad, and if GitHub hadn't complied with the takedown anyone involved with that decision would literally be put in jail. Unlike normal copyright infringement (which is usually just a shitton of money damages) messing with DRM is a felony, punishable by up to five years in jail. Unless you literally want Microsoft to start committing insurrection against the US government. I'd rather lose youtube-dl than live in a world where tech companies are corporate sovereigns.
- R0b0t1 6y ago
  Again, no: Github could assert the law is invalid in this context and/or there is no way that youtube-dl can be DMCA'd. It takes principles to do this, and apparently they have none.