One could argue that browsers themselves violate the so called "spirit of the law" because they interpret javascript. Browser names/standards/whatever are not

One could argue that browsers themselves violate the so called "spirit of the law" because they interpret javascript. Browser names/standards/whatever are not codified in law. youtube-dl is no different than Google Chrome in this regard. Good luck proving otherwise. If the video had legitimate copy protection and used encryption, etc. I could understand it, but the videos can be pulled by anything that can interpret Javascript. Ask Oracle and Apple how those lawsuits turned out.