My understanding is that it's takedown was due to fact that youtube-dl "bypasses technical measures that control access or copying of copyrighted works". I don'

My understanding is that it's takedown was due to fact that youtube-dl "bypasses technical measures that control access or copying of copyrighted works". I don't see how youtube-dl could be considered a "circumvention tool" if the end user of said tool would have access to the content if they used a web browser instead.