4 ms·

they have a disclaimer below https://github.com/LuanRT/YouTube.js#disclaimer https://github.com/LuanRT/YouTube.js#disclaimer edit: why am i getting downvoted?

freedomben 5y ago
IANAL but I've worked with some of them and I'd guess that isn't sufficient. My advice to avoid any negative attention from YT/Google (but again IANAL) would be to do two things: 1. Move the "this is an unofficial" disclaimer at the top and bold and/or italic it so it's totally unmissable. I would use the same approach as MarshallOfSound: https://github.com/MarshallOfSound/Google-Play-Music-Desktop-Player-UNOFFICIAL- https://github.com/MarshallOfSound/Google-Play-Music-Desktop... 2. Praise Youtube/Google for having such a great API that empowers and enables their users to get the most out of their subscription. Make sure to point out the (true) benefits that YT gets from having a library like this that is available but they don't have to maintain and promise nothing to.
saurik 5y ago
The disclaimer doesn't really matter, as 1) we wouldn't really expect that many people to read it and 2) it is going to get used in a ton of contexts without that disclaimer... such as in the headline of this Hacker News post. I can't make a company "Apple Computer Backstage" and just put a little note on my website that says "Apple Computer Backstage has no involvement with Apple Computer". This project simply should not have "YouTube" in its name... or, if it absolutely must, it at least needs to be on the other side of some kind of preposition. This insistence upon using other peoples' trademarks in the names of third-party clients based on adversarial interoperability--something that the company often has every reason to "throw the book at" as it is inherently hostile--is what ends up killing the vast majority of these projects over time. This isn't "in for a penny, in for a pound": you need to carefully choose your battles, and flagrantly violating someone's trademarks is going to be your weakest link as it is such low hanging legal fruit and doesn't actually buy you anything.

freedomben 5y ago

IANAL but I've worked with some of them and I'd guess that isn't sufficient. My advice to avoid any negative attention from YT/Google (but again IANAL) would be to do two things: 1. Move the "this is an unofficial" disclaimer at the top and bold and/or italic it so it's totally unmissable. I would use the same approach as MarshallOfSound: https://github.com/MarshallOfSound/Google-Play-Music-Desktop-Player-UNOFFICIAL- https://github.com/MarshallOfSound/Google-Play-Music-Desktop... 2. Praise Youtube/Google for having such a great API that empowers and enables their users to get the most out of their subscription. Make sure to point out the (true) benefits that YT gets from having a library like this that is available but they don't have to maintain and promise nothing to.

saurik 5y ago

The disclaimer doesn't really matter, as 1) we wouldn't really expect that many people to read it and 2) it is going to get used in a ton of contexts without that disclaimer... such as in the headline of this Hacker News post. I can't make a company "Apple Computer Backstage" and just put a little note on my website that says "Apple Computer Backstage has no involvement with Apple Computer". This project simply should not have "YouTube" in its name... or, if it absolutely must, it at least needs to be on the other side of some kind of preposition. This insistence upon using other peoples' trademarks in the names of third-party clients based on adversarial interoperability--something that the company often has every reason to "throw the book at" as it is inherently hostile--is what ends up killing the vast majority of these projects over time. This isn't "in for a penny, in for a pound": you need to carefully choose your battles, and flagrantly violating someone's trademarks is going to be your weakest link as it is such low hanging legal fruit and doesn't actually buy you anything.