6 ms·

If this isn't antitrust behavior going on in broad daylight, then what is? Are the competition commissions of US sleeping in blissful ignorance while enjoying o

by pyeri 3y ago

If this isn't antitrust behavior going on in broad daylight, then what is? Are the competition commissions of US sleeping in blissful ignorance while enjoying on taxpayer's salary? The least they should do is shut down those commissions to prevent wastage!

izacus 3y ago
In previous debates on this very site, people said that scraping/calling an API without service owners permission is not allowed and even illegal in US (if I remember correctly). In light of that, how can this be an antitrust case?
- rany_ 3y ago
  > people said that scraping/calling an API without service owners permission is not allowed I think it is legal, the API is public data and accessing it should be protected by the First Amendment as far as I know. Otherwise scrapping in general would not be allowed and search engines couldn't just crawl sites and list them as they'd need the permission of every site operator they list. I don't see why APIs would be treated any different, and in Invidious' case they are actually scrapping the HTML page and not using the Android YouTube API. So it's a slightly different case but I do think that using that Android YouTube API should be OK as well, it's all public anyway.
  - deleted 3y ago
    [deleted]
- veave 3y ago
  There is no API call that returns a direct link to the video file. To get it, you have to defeat encryption measures, and that is illegal under the DMCA.
  - flagrant_taco 3y ago
    Couldn't you just scrape HTML from YouTube's site? That's not the most efficient route, but a public API call returning enough info to generate the site's viewer URL gives which info to go scrape the page for the video itself
    - veave 3y ago
      That doesn't work. The video URL is not in plain text in the HTML. They send you encrypted data and you have to decrypt it using javascript that they also send you. It is, therefore, an encryption measure, which is illegal to break under the DMCA
      - LocalH 3y ago
        The DMCA was a huge mistake
      - malermeister 3y ago
        Are the devs American? If not, does the DMCA even have jurisdiction?
        moi2388 3y ago
        Non-Americans are obviously not subject to US law. However unfortunately most countries have patent/copyright/dmca-like legislation for no reason whatsoever
      - ohgodplsno 3y ago
        Encryption isn't broken by Invidious, nor by youtube-dl or anything else. Youtube sends a bunch of Javascript, Invidious interprets it and runs the code. Unless Google wants to prove that running secret_youtube_sauce.js can only be ran by specific user-agents on their own website otherwise it's DMCA infringement, they can try. If they win, you've got a bigger problem anyways, since they would win the right to only allow Chrome to access Google properties.
        vineyardmike 3y ago
  - rolph 3y ago
    https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=24876321#24876567 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=24876321#24876567 https://torrentfreak.com/deciphering-youtubes-rolling-cypher-in-your-browser-is-a-piece-of-cake-201030/ https://torrentfreak.com/deciphering-youtubes-rolling-cypher...
  - rasz 3y ago
    ... or you build an User Agent that executes whatever 1mb_garbage_ytplayer.js and let google code give you decoded links
- StimDeck 3y ago
  Scraping is legal. https://techcrunch.com/2022/04/18/web-scraping-legal-court/ https://techcrunch.com/2022/04/18/web-scraping-legal-court/ https://www.forbes.com/sites/zacharysmith/2022/04/18/scraping-data-from-linkedin-profiles-is-legal-appeals-court-rules/?sh=2188c9e12a9c https://www.forbes.com/sites/zacharysmith/2022/04/18/scrapin...
- potsandpans 3y ago
  people get on here and say things all the time that are wrong though.
- pessimizer 3y ago
  Everybody has forgotten the Great Padmapper Debate in the desire to pretend like the answers are simple and obvious.
tinus_hn 3y ago
What competition is this preventing? Your complaint is similar to being angry you can’t sell beer in someone else’s bar.
- realusername 3y ago
  Youtube itself is a monopoly, alternative frontends is the absolute minimum we can do as anti-trust legislation isn't applied
  - tinus_hn 3y ago
    What hurtful aspects of the so called monopoly would be solved by those alternative frontends? The inability to watch YouTube without ads?
    - pyeri 3y ago
      But why does that monopoly exists in the first place? If it's owing to their piggy backing using the search engine arm, this is certainly the competition or anti-trust commissions should take notice of and act upon it?
      - tinus_hn 3y ago
        Why answer the question, if you can just spin some innuendo around it?
        flangola7 3y ago
        What innuendo?
    - realusername 3y ago
      Alternative frontends can at least reduce a bit the control of the platform on what you see.
- code_duck 3y ago

by pyeri 3y ago

izacus 3y ago

In previous debates on this very site, people said that scraping/calling an API without service owners permission is not allowed and even illegal in US (if I remember correctly). In light of that, how can this be an antitrust case?

rany_ 3y ago
> people said that scraping/calling an API without service owners permission is not allowed I think it is legal, the API is public data and accessing it should be protected by the First Amendment as far as I know. Otherwise scrapping in general would not be allowed and search engines couldn't just crawl sites and list them as they'd need the permission of every site operator they list. I don't see why APIs would be treated any different, and in Invidious' case they are actually scrapping the HTML page and not using the Android YouTube API. So it's a slightly different case but I do think that using that Android YouTube API should be OK as well, it's all public anyway.
- deleted 3y ago
  [deleted]
veave 3y ago
There is no API call that returns a direct link to the video file. To get it, you have to defeat encryption measures, and that is illegal under the DMCA.
- flagrant_taco 3y ago
  Couldn't you just scrape HTML from YouTube's site? That's not the most efficient route, but a public API call returning enough info to generate the site's viewer URL gives which info to go scrape the page for the video itself
  - veave 3y ago
    That doesn't work. The video URL is not in plain text in the HTML. They send you encrypted data and you have to decrypt it using javascript that they also send you. It is, therefore, an encryption measure, which is illegal to break under the DMCA
    - LocalH 3y ago
      The DMCA was a huge mistake
    - malermeister 3y ago
      Are the devs American? If not, does the DMCA even have jurisdiction?
      - moi2388 3y ago
        Non-Americans are obviously not subject to US law. However unfortunately most countries have patent/copyright/dmca-like legislation for no reason whatsoever
    - ohgodplsno 3y ago
      Encryption isn't broken by Invidious, nor by youtube-dl or anything else. Youtube sends a bunch of Javascript, Invidious interprets it and runs the code. Unless Google wants to prove that running secret_youtube_sauce.js can only be ran by specific user-agents on their own website otherwise it's DMCA infringement, they can try. If they win, you've got a bigger problem anyways, since they would win the right to only allow Chrome to access Google properties.
      - vineyardmike 3y ago
- rolph 3y ago
  https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=24876321#24876567 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=24876321#24876567 https://torrentfreak.com/deciphering-youtubes-rolling-cypher-in-your-browser-is-a-piece-of-cake-201030/ https://torrentfreak.com/deciphering-youtubes-rolling-cypher...
- rasz 3y ago
  ... or you build an User Agent that executes whatever 1mb_garbage_ytplayer.js and let google code give you decoded links
StimDeck 3y ago
Scraping is legal. https://techcrunch.com/2022/04/18/web-scraping-legal-court/ https://techcrunch.com/2022/04/18/web-scraping-legal-court/ https://www.forbes.com/sites/zacharysmith/2022/04/18/scraping-data-from-linkedin-profiles-is-legal-appeals-court-rules/?sh=2188c9e12a9c https://www.forbes.com/sites/zacharysmith/2022/04/18/scrapin...
potsandpans 3y ago
people get on here and say things all the time that are wrong though.
pessimizer 3y ago
Everybody has forgotten the Great Padmapper Debate in the desire to pretend like the answers are simple and obvious.

tinus_hn 3y ago

What competition is this preventing? Your complaint is similar to being angry you can’t sell beer in someone else’s bar.

realusername 3y ago
Youtube itself is a monopoly, alternative frontends is the absolute minimum we can do as anti-trust legislation isn't applied
- tinus_hn 3y ago
  What hurtful aspects of the so called monopoly would be solved by those alternative frontends? The inability to watch YouTube without ads?
  - pyeri 3y ago
    But why does that monopoly exists in the first place? If it's owing to their piggy backing using the search engine arm, this is certainly the competition or anti-trust commissions should take notice of and act upon it?
    - tinus_hn 3y ago
      Why answer the question, if you can just spin some innuendo around it?
      - flangola7 3y ago
        What innuendo?
  - realusername 3y ago
    Alternative frontends can at least reduce a bit the control of the platform on what you see.
code_duck 3y ago