On: YouTube-dl has received a DMCA takedown from RIAA

[larrik]

The Betamax case was about stuff broadcast over public airwaves, whereas this is a medium that the RIAA barely tolerates, rather than the (ideal) main distribution channel. Seems like a big enough difference to me.

[ethanwillis → larrik]

The ruling there doesn't seem to rule out making copies of shows from a cable network, which are not exactly public airwaves in the same sense I think you mean.

[throwaway17_17 → larrik]

I don’t see the fact that the RIAA dislikes internet based streaming as relevant to the analysis. Downloading a publicly available video transmitted over a nearly global communications network is directly analogous to recording a show to tape from a TV signal.

[Reelin → throwaway17_17]

The signal is broadcast (ie not under your control) and so the sole purpose being permitted there is time shifting.

YouTube is an on demand stream. It would be comparable to recording a pay per view movie that you purchased. Is that legal? (The question isn't rhetorical, but I seriously doubt it.)

[hunter2_ → Reelin]

What if your intent is to shift to a time when Youtube doesn't exist?

[omgwtfbyobbq → hunter2_]

It when you don't have access to it (plane flight, etc). That sounds like time shifting to me.

[McDyver → Reelin]

If, for example, you bought a movie and downloaded it to watch on a plane when you can't have access to streaming, why wouldn't it be legal?

[Reelin → McDyver]

That would be an interesting argument. I suspect it would be illegal because a pay per view stream is typically time limited. But if the stream itself were still valid while you were on the plane ... ?

[kzrdude → Reelin]

What about using youtube-dl as the only technical way to play it on a low power device, like with mpv on an Rpi or old laptop.

That's a kind of tech adaption of the streaming/playback mode (and I've done it a ton on previous laptops)

[anticensor → kzrdude]

Then RIAA would argue for a DRMd version of downloader that is prevented from doing it in high power deviced.

[hilbert42 → larrik]

"...this is a medium that the RIAA barely tolerates, rather than the (ideal) main distribution channel."

Right, this is the precise problem, and it has to be solved - not by a free-for-all but with proper equitabl copywrite laws.

As matters stand, it's only going to get worse. Say we assume that if somehow both YouTube downloads are made much more difficult to crack AND no downloaders are available, then viewers and downloaders will then use newer tech that's even easier to use to record the videos. With new hi-resonution 4k cameras becoming commonly available, they'll be able to record stuff with still-excellent resolution by just photographing the monitor.

Of course, that still won't deter the RIAA, I can see them trying to ban cardboard covers and jigs that hold cameras and monitors accurately in alignment.