5 ms·

> you are providing a service that scrapes videos from YouTube. ... > I could completely understand why Google would not want such a feature in your product So

by senko 4y ago

> you are providing a service that scrapes videos from YouTube. ... > I could completely understand why Google would not want such a feature in your product So, when Google scraped the internet to provide search engine, that was okay, but when some other site scrapes something, it is not? If they are doing something illegal, by all means sue or report them. But Google acting as police, judge, jury and executioner here shows why it's a problem to have a single unregulated company with so much power.

blinding-streak 4y ago
Robots.txt is a thing.
- senko 4y ago
  If robots.txt were a thing, Google would never have built its search engine. Everyone would just allow Altavista and disallow everyone else, like they do with Googlebot and Bingbot now. Also, the issue here is not that Google banned their tool from accessing YouTube because the tool didn't obey robots.txt. The issue is that Google, the search engine, nuked their site, because they didn't like its content.
psydvl 4y ago
While scrapping Google follows robots.txt file rules
- megous 4y ago
  https://www.youtube.com/robots.txt https://www.youtube.com/robots.txt Looks like scraping is allowed then, if your robot is named "Mediapartners-Google*" And you can name your robot whatever you like (there's no legally enforced nor defacto registry), so my robot: "Mediapartners-Google-im-cleary-not-a-member-of/1.0" Can legally scrape anything on google's youtube. Perfect.
sshine 4y ago
> So, when Google scraped the internet to provide search engine, that was okay, but when some other site scrapes something, it is not? No, but when Google scraped the Internet, nobody did anything about it. The value they added by making everything searchable was so great. Giving content creators platform flexibility is clearly a threat to YouTube. Double standards are twice as good.
- justsomehnguy 4y ago
  ++Google
- hulitu 4y ago
  > The value they added by making everything searchable was so great. Altavista, yahoo
belter 4y ago
Google did not only scrapped the web. - Google recorded half of the planet with cameras scanning license plates, addresses, faces. You see those blurred in Google Maps, but the license plates, faces, are not blurred in the internal data at Google. I am still to see confirmation of data correlation not occurring. - They scanned the Wifi MAC addresses associated with physical addresses "by mistake". - They scanned public records of companies, and associated them publicly and sometimes the private address of the owner, and invite you as the owner to "take ownership" of their google map data...
- 2OEH8eoCRo0 4y ago
  > They scanned the Wifi MAC addresses associated with physical addresses "by mistake". https://www.theguardian.com/technology/2010/may/15/google-admits-storing-private-data https://www.theguardian.com/technology/2010/may/15/google-ad... German request for data audit reveals the web giant 'accidentally' stored payload information from open networks
- chii 4y ago
  > Google recorded half of the planet with cameras not to be a google apologist, but they only ever record public areas. Do you hold tourists that take photos to the same standard? > are not blurred in the internal data at Google. whatever is in internal google is irrelevant, since the data is not exposed publicly. Do you expect that a tourist that took the same photo with a license plate to blur out their photo in their own private album? I would expect that the tourist that publishes the photo (say, on facebook) blur out the license plate, but not when it's in their own private album. > sometimes the private address of the owner how did google get the private address of the owner of a public business? I don't quite understand the claim to the wrong doing.
  - belter 4y ago
    >not to be a google apologist, but they only ever record public areas. Do you hold tourists that take photos to the same standard? Tourist don't do the same thing. Why do you think there is almost no Google Street View in Germany? > whatever is in internal google is irrelevant, since the data is not exposed publicly... GDPR -> "What information must be given to individuals whose data is collected?" https://ec.europa.eu/info/law/law-topic/data-protection/reform/rules-business-and-organisations/principles-gdpr/what-information-must-be-given-individuals-whose-data-collected_en https://ec.europa.eu/info/law/law-topic/data-protection/refo... > how did google get the private address of the owner of a public business? I don't quite understand the claim to the wrong doing. Google got it because some owners have their company registered to their own private address. It's the extra step of publicly exposing that info and pressuring you to take ownership of it otherwise it will be shown on Google Map an offer that currently is 98% of the market. Why do you think you have the option of blurring the view of your house in Google Maps?
ehnto 4y ago
Everyone was within their rights to deny Google access to their machines for scraping, but that would have been impossible to do. The web is only a psuedo public apparatus, filled with private computers. While you could technically deny access to a specific person you could never actually implement that or follow it up legally.

by senko 4y ago

blinding-streak 4y ago

Robots.txt is a thing.

senko 4y ago
If robots.txt were a thing, Google would never have built its search engine. Everyone would just allow Altavista and disallow everyone else, like they do with Googlebot and Bingbot now. Also, the issue here is not that Google banned their tool from accessing YouTube because the tool didn't obey robots.txt. The issue is that Google, the search engine, nuked their site, because they didn't like its content.

psydvl 4y ago

While scrapping Google follows robots.txt file rules

megous 4y ago
https://www.youtube.com/robots.txt https://www.youtube.com/robots.txt Looks like scraping is allowed then, if your robot is named "Mediapartners-Google*" And you can name your robot whatever you like (there's no legally enforced nor defacto registry), so my robot: "Mediapartners-Google-im-cleary-not-a-member-of/1.0" Can legally scrape anything on google's youtube. Perfect.

sshine 4y ago

> So, when Google scraped the internet to provide search engine, that was okay, but when some other site scrapes something, it is not? No, but when Google scraped the Internet, nobody did anything about it. The value they added by making everything searchable was so great. Giving content creators platform flexibility is clearly a threat to YouTube. Double standards are twice as good.

justsomehnguy 4y ago
++Google
hulitu 4y ago
> The value they added by making everything searchable was so great. Altavista, yahoo

belter 4y ago

Google did not only scrapped the web. - Google recorded half of the planet with cameras scanning license plates, addresses, faces. You see those blurred in Google Maps, but the license plates, faces, are not blurred in the internal data at Google. I am still to see confirmation of data correlation not occurring. - They scanned the Wifi MAC addresses associated with physical addresses "by mistake". - They scanned public records of companies, and associated them publicly and sometimes the private address of the owner, and invite you as the owner to "take ownership" of their google map data...

2OEH8eoCRo0 4y ago
> They scanned the Wifi MAC addresses associated with physical addresses "by mistake". https://www.theguardian.com/technology/2010/may/15/google-admits-storing-private-data https://www.theguardian.com/technology/2010/may/15/google-ad... German request for data audit reveals the web giant 'accidentally' stored payload information from open networks
chii 4y ago
> Google recorded half of the planet with cameras not to be a google apologist, but they only ever record public areas. Do you hold tourists that take photos to the same standard? > are not blurred in the internal data at Google. whatever is in internal google is irrelevant, since the data is not exposed publicly. Do you expect that a tourist that took the same photo with a license plate to blur out their photo in their own private album? I would expect that the tourist that publishes the photo (say, on facebook) blur out the license plate, but not when it's in their own private album. > sometimes the private address of the owner how did google get the private address of the owner of a public business? I don't quite understand the claim to the wrong doing.
- belter 4y ago
  >not to be a google apologist, but they only ever record public areas. Do you hold tourists that take photos to the same standard? Tourist don't do the same thing. Why do you think there is almost no Google Street View in Germany? > whatever is in internal google is irrelevant, since the data is not exposed publicly... GDPR -> "What information must be given to individuals whose data is collected?" https://ec.europa.eu/info/law/law-topic/data-protection/reform/rules-business-and-organisations/principles-gdpr/what-information-must-be-given-individuals-whose-data-collected_en https://ec.europa.eu/info/law/law-topic/data-protection/refo... > how did google get the private address of the owner of a public business? I don't quite understand the claim to the wrong doing. Google got it because some owners have their company registered to their own private address. It's the extra step of publicly exposing that info and pressuring you to take ownership of it otherwise it will be shown on Google Map an offer that currently is 98% of the market. Why do you think you have the option of blurring the view of your house in Google Maps?

ehnto 4y ago

Everyone was within their rights to deny Google access to their machines for scraping, but that would have been impossible to do. The web is only a psuedo public apparatus, filled with private computers. While you could technically deny access to a specific person you could never actually implement that or follow it up legally.