Repository with text of DMCA takedown notices as received. GitHub does not endorse or adopt any assertion contained in the following notices. Users identified in the notices are presumed innocent u...
Fucking pieces of shit. Should not be this angry while drunk at nearly 4 in the night.
But, youtube-dl doesn't have any DRM circumvention. How can they argue that this "circumvents the technological protection measures used by authorized streaming services"?
Not quite - on some videos, the stream URLs sent to the browser are encrypted with an algorithm that can be decrypted just fine in the browser, but takes a fair bit of reverse engineering to make it work in other places. Not defending the RIAA here lol but it's quite a bit more than "doesn't have a download button".
Right? I'm downloading it to my computer when I watch the video in a browser. That's how streaming works. There's no DRM unless you count "mild inconvenience" as a DRM measure.
sure and it's another example of the fundamental contradiction of DRM (all the more glaring when you're trying to use DRM to enforce IP over the wire), which is what I'm getting at
But, youtube-dl doesn't have any DRM circumvention. How can they argue that this "circumvents the technological protection measures used by authorized streaming services"?
Lol, laws don't mean anything, its about power, capital has the power, we don't.
Ⓐ
deleted by creator
imagine trying to get basic linux commands banned. then again i put nothing above companies these days
Those would at least have legal backing from the FSF or something.
Not quite - on some videos, the stream URLs sent to the browser are encrypted with an algorithm that can be decrypted just fine in the browser, but takes a fair bit of reverse engineering to make it work in other places. Not defending the RIAA here lol but it's quite a bit more than "doesn't have a download button".
Right? I'm downloading it to my computer when I watch the video in a browser. That's how streaming works. There's no DRM unless you count "mild inconvenience" as a DRM measure.
i would guess it's because they sell youtube a license for streaming, and downloading isn't covered by that or some shit
streaming is downloading
Yes, but for licensing purposes it is not
sure and it's another example of the fundamental contradiction of DRM (all the more glaring when you're trying to use DRM to enforce IP over the wire), which is what I'm getting at
What do you think i am arguing in favour of exactly?
I didn't realize this was an argument
Then i'm confused as to why you decided to reply to me in the first place.
Someone had already said the same thing you did to the OP