Re:GitHub Source Code Leak
by 1vuio0pswjnm7 on Thursday November 05, 2020 @02:34AM
(#24996331)
What/who does the "You" in YouTube stand for. From where I sit, it never stood for RIAA members the commercial works they profit from. Recall the Time magazine "Man of the Year" cover many years ago circa the debut of YouTube. It was, IIRC, supposed to be mirror. The "you" that was named "Man of the Year" was not meant to be a RIAA member corporation. It was meant to be an ordinary, non-commercial internet user. The entertainment industry has "taken over" what I thought was a resource for non-commercial internet users to share video. Here we are seeing the resulting effects of acquiescing to that "takeover". I would guess most content on YouTube is in fact non-commercial, true to the website's original purpose, which arguably makes youtube-dl useful for non-commercial purposes. However, it seems that is not what Microsoft thinks. The (passive-aggreesive) "corporatisation" of the internet (via the web). Lame.
[ Parent
| on HN ]
The non-commercial content on YouTube is decidedly not the content which is protected with the copy-protection which the RIAA is (presumably) alleging that youtube-dl circumvents.
Re:GitHub Source Code Leak
by TheKarateKid on Thursday November 05, 2020 @01:22PM
(#25000564)
It's frustrating because the RIAA is not just requesting that the "infringing" part of the tool is removed. They want the entire tool removed, even for the parts which there is no question of infringement. For example, the 100's of other websites that it works with.
Removing pieces of it is not within GitHub's power. ytdl could most certainly remove the pieces which RIAA has a claim against and re-upload it.
Re:GitHub Source Code Leak
by 1vuio0pswjnm7 on Thursday November 05, 2020 @03:54AM
(#24996658)
Yup.