4 ms·

It's important to remember that these projects are not violating copyright law, are not circumvention tools, and that filing a DMCA notice against them is in fa

by ronsor 7mo ago

It's important to remember that these projects are not violating copyright law, are not circumvention tools, and that filing a DMCA notice against them is in fact unlawful.

charcircuit 7mo ago
Linking to piracy sites whose content is all blatantly stolen from artists does seem violating to me.
- raziel2701 7mo ago
  what piracy sites is gallery-dl linking to?
  - charcircuit 7mo ago
    I do not want to promote them here, but if you read the linked github thread you will see the names of what extractors were deleted.
    - logifail 7mo ago
      Through the DCMA lens, does a tool having the ability to download from example.com = linking to example.com?
      - charcircuit 7mo ago
        In this case the files you could view on github literally had links directly to copyrighted works. It was not just that it was compatible with pirate sites.
        KomoD 7mo ago
        Where? I looked at a copy from March 16, and I only saw placeholders like 12345 and 12345/67890abcde in the files mentioned in the issue
        charcircuit 7mo ago
        Look in the test vectors and you will see ones that are not for generic ids.
    - ddtaylor 7mo ago
      Wait a second... By the view you're espousing right now, doesn't that make this conversation "illegal"? Why aren't we filing DMCA takedowns to HN because the list of the naughty sites is at the top of the page for this very thread? This seems like turtles all the way down.
- ddtaylor 7mo ago
  That seems like an argument to go after the actual alleged illegally hosted materials through the proper DMCA takedown request.
  - charcircuit 7mo ago
    Both should be done. Often the actual illegally hosted materials are on servers not friendly with takedown requests or will get immediately reloaded by the pirates. By going after the links it can cut off the ability for people to find the illegally hosted materials.
    - ddtaylor 7mo ago
      Seems like a strange way to attempt to police the internet by proxy. The Internet should ignore or route around people attempting to police how nodes connect to each other.
      - charcircuit 7mo ago
        I agree that the larger Internet should be capable of routing lawful traffic through jurisdictions where such traffic is lawful to another jurisdiction where the traffic is lawful. But within a country for example local laws should be applied to the traffic.
        AnthonyMouse 7mo ago
        There are two options here: 1) You can have an encrypted connection between two jurisdictions that have different laws, but then anyone can route around censorship because you don't know if they're discussing geopolitics or distributing DeCSS. 2) You can't have an encrypted connection between two jurisdictions that have different laws, which is >99% of all connections because even different cities have different laws, which is an Orwellian panopticon and the destruction of all privacy. I'm going to have to insist we stick with the first one.
        6mo ago
- perching_aix 6mo ago
  Which is heartbreaking (and I'd argue misleading too), but not the whole story. You can only issue takedowns in relation with material that you have copyright over. At least one of these sites I know for a fact routinely scrubs FAKKU licensed content, and abides by takedown requests.
imrozim 7mo ago
[dead]
sammy2255 7mo ago
No one has the guts, time, or money to challenge it though
- userbinator 7mo ago
  This is what groups like the EFF are for: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_litigation_involving_the_Electronic_Frontier_Foundation https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_litigation_involving_t...
  - awakeasleep 7mo ago
    In general no! The EFF is not interested in litigating laws that are firmly established! They spend their resources on cases that can set legal precedent. When you call about something like this, they’ll try to give you some general advice and refer you to a law firm.
    - bpavuk 6mo ago
      but can't it set a dangerous precedent if it escalates further?
- ddtaylor 7mo ago
  Sadly, you're mostly right and the comments section saying to find a pro-bono lawyer is laughable. I think anyone who believes that exists should actually reach out to a real lawyer and see how that conversation goes. I've had those conversations. Firstly, they can't exist most of the time you can't actually call a lawyer and talk to them - you get their office and their "job" is to gatekeep that lawyer from making any discussions with anyone who isn't represented or paid for a consultation. Secondly, once you do get into contact with them you'll get a blank stare or phone silence. This is not how most lawyers view pro-bono work. Most of them have a very small quota of pro-bono work to be done and that's it. They get assigned a case by their firm or go and accept a few a year from the state and they're done with it. The idea that an altruistic lawyer exists out there ready to do free and unpaid work is virtually non-existent today.
direwolf20 7mo ago
It's lawful if you have a good faith belief that it's a circumvention tool. It might even be true. Not having a download button is a copy protection measure as defined in the DMCA. If this project bypasses not having a download button, it's an illegal circumvention measure under DMCA.
- ehhthing 7mo ago
  The problem here is that the complaint seems to be filed by the copyright owner (or licensee) but the code is accessing piracy sites. There could be a circumvention case if the piracy site is the one filing the copyright complaint, but they have not.
  - nondrool 7mo ago
    https://github.com/mikf/gallery-dl/discussions/9304#discussioncomment-16279674 I know for sure that at least some of the listed sites already remove content in response to fakku dmca. There is no fakku content on there. https://github.com/mikf/gallery-dl/discussions/9304#discussioncomment-16280050 they also list hentaifoundry which afaik is a site for users to post their own art and is certainly not a piracy site
- dns_snek 7mo ago
  > Not having a download button is a copy protection measure. That's absurd. Not having something is different from actively implementing measures to prevent something. I could similarly make the argument that any content that I can watch on my device doesn't really have copy protection measures because those bytes were purposefully copied into my display buffer. Anti-circumvention provisions are a cancer that needs to die. They can be used to criminalize just about anything.
  - ls612 6mo ago
    You will own nothing and you will be happy. Or else.
- close04 7mo ago

by ronsor 7mo ago

It's important to remember that these projects are not violating copyright law, are not circumvention tools, and that filing a DMCA notice against them is in fact unlawful.

charcircuit 7mo ago

Linking to piracy sites whose content is all blatantly stolen from artists does seem violating to me.

raziel2701 7mo ago
what piracy sites is gallery-dl linking to?
- charcircuit 7mo ago
  I do not want to promote them here, but if you read the linked github thread you will see the names of what extractors were deleted.
  - logifail 7mo ago
    Through the DCMA lens, does a tool having the ability to download from example.com = linking to example.com?
    - charcircuit 7mo ago
      In this case the files you could view on github literally had links directly to copyrighted works. It was not just that it was compatible with pirate sites.
      - KomoD 7mo ago
        Where? I looked at a copy from March 16, and I only saw placeholders like 12345 and 12345/67890abcde in the files mentioned in the issue
        charcircuit 7mo ago
        Look in the test vectors and you will see ones that are not for generic ids.
  - ddtaylor 7mo ago
    Wait a second... By the view you're espousing right now, doesn't that make this conversation "illegal"? Why aren't we filing DMCA takedowns to HN because the list of the naughty sites is at the top of the page for this very thread? This seems like turtles all the way down.
ddtaylor 7mo ago
That seems like an argument to go after the actual alleged illegally hosted materials through the proper DMCA takedown request.
- charcircuit 7mo ago
  Both should be done. Often the actual illegally hosted materials are on servers not friendly with takedown requests or will get immediately reloaded by the pirates. By going after the links it can cut off the ability for people to find the illegally hosted materials.
  - ddtaylor 7mo ago
    Seems like a strange way to attempt to police the internet by proxy. The Internet should ignore or route around people attempting to police how nodes connect to each other.
    - charcircuit 7mo ago
      I agree that the larger Internet should be capable of routing lawful traffic through jurisdictions where such traffic is lawful to another jurisdiction where the traffic is lawful. But within a country for example local laws should be applied to the traffic.
      - AnthonyMouse 7mo ago
        There are two options here: 1) You can have an encrypted connection between two jurisdictions that have different laws, but then anyone can route around censorship because you don't know if they're discussing geopolitics or distributing DeCSS. 2) You can't have an encrypted connection between two jurisdictions that have different laws, which is >99% of all connections because even different cities have different laws, which is an Orwellian panopticon and the destruction of all privacy. I'm going to have to insist we stick with the first one.
        6mo ago
perching_aix 6mo ago
Which is heartbreaking (and I'd argue misleading too), but not the whole story. You can only issue takedowns in relation with material that you have copyright over. At least one of these sites I know for a fact routinely scrubs FAKKU licensed content, and abides by takedown requests.

imrozim 7mo ago

[dead]

sammy2255 7mo ago

No one has the guts, time, or money to challenge it though

userbinator 7mo ago
This is what groups like the EFF are for: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_litigation_involving_the_Electronic_Frontier_Foundation https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_litigation_involving_t...
- awakeasleep 7mo ago
  In general no! The EFF is not interested in litigating laws that are firmly established! They spend their resources on cases that can set legal precedent. When you call about something like this, they’ll try to give you some general advice and refer you to a law firm.
  - bpavuk 6mo ago
    but can't it set a dangerous precedent if it escalates further?
ddtaylor 7mo ago
Sadly, you're mostly right and the comments section saying to find a pro-bono lawyer is laughable. I think anyone who believes that exists should actually reach out to a real lawyer and see how that conversation goes. I've had those conversations. Firstly, they can't exist most of the time you can't actually call a lawyer and talk to them - you get their office and their "job" is to gatekeep that lawyer from making any discussions with anyone who isn't represented or paid for a consultation. Secondly, once you do get into contact with them you'll get a blank stare or phone silence. This is not how most lawyers view pro-bono work. Most of them have a very small quota of pro-bono work to be done and that's it. They get assigned a case by their firm or go and accept a few a year from the state and they're done with it. The idea that an altruistic lawyer exists out there ready to do free and unpaid work is virtually non-existent today.

direwolf20 7mo ago

It's lawful if you have a good faith belief that it's a circumvention tool. It might even be true. Not having a download button is a copy protection measure as defined in the DMCA. If this project bypasses not having a download button, it's an illegal circumvention measure under DMCA.

ehhthing 7mo ago
The problem here is that the complaint seems to be filed by the copyright owner (or licensee) but the code is accessing piracy sites. There could be a circumvention case if the piracy site is the one filing the copyright complaint, but they have not.
- nondrool 7mo ago
  https://github.com/mikf/gallery-dl/discussions/9304#discussioncomment-16279674 I know for sure that at least some of the listed sites already remove content in response to fakku dmca. There is no fakku content on there. https://github.com/mikf/gallery-dl/discussions/9304#discussioncomment-16280050 they also list hentaifoundry which afaik is a site for users to post their own art and is certainly not a piracy site
dns_snek 7mo ago
> Not having a download button is a copy protection measure. That's absurd. Not having something is different from actively implementing measures to prevent something. I could similarly make the argument that any content that I can watch on my device doesn't really have copy protection measures because those bytes were purposefully copied into my display buffer. Anti-circumvention provisions are a cancer that needs to die. They can be used to criminalize just about anything.
- ls612 6mo ago
  You will own nothing and you will be happy. Or else.
close04 7mo ago