Yout LLC vs. the RIAA, Inc. (2020)

  • Twórca wątku Twórca wątku Null
  • Data rozpoczęcia Data rozpoczęcia
  • 🇵🇦 Nuestro primer dominio localizado está en español en kiwifarms.pa. Our first localized domain is on Spanish on kiwifarms.pa.
  • Want to keep track of this thread?
    Accounts can bookmark posts, watch threads for updates, and jump back to where you stopped reading.
    Create account

Yout LLC v. Recording Industry Association of America, Inc. 3:20-cv-01602 — District Court, D. Connecticut

  • Docket No.
    3:20-cv-01602
  • Court
    District Court, D. Connecticut
  • Filed
    24 Paź 2020
  • Terminated
    29 Wrz 2022
  • Nature of Suit
    820 Copyright
  • Cause
    28:2201 Declaratory Judgment
  • Jurisdiction
    Federal Question
  • Jury Demand
    Plaintiff
  • Last Filing
    12 Sty 2023

Parties (3)

Parties
Doe Record Companies, Recording Industry Association of America, Inc., Yout LLC

Recent Filings (showing 5 of 109)

# Date Description Filing
71 12 Sty 2023 ORDER denying without prejudice defendant Recording Industry Association of America's 65 Motion for Attorneys' Fees and denying as moot plaintiff Yout, LLC's 67 Motion to Stay. I grant the Recording Industry Associ ation of America leave to re-file its motion for attorneys' fees and costs no later than fourteen days after entry of the mandate by the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Second Circuit. Signed by Judge Stefan R. Underhill on 1/13/2022. (Hurley, S.) 1 2
70 4 Sty 2023 REPLY to Response to 67 MOTION to Stay re 65 MOTION for Attorney Fees, 65 MOTION for Attorney Fees filed by Yout LLC. (Attachments: # 1 Exhibit Declaration of Johnathan Nader)(Mudd, Charles) (Entered: 01/05/2023) 1 2 3
69 21 Gru 2022 Memorandum in Opposition to Plaintiff Yout LLC's Motion to Stay Defendant RIAA's Motion for Attorneys' Fees re 67 MOTION to Stay re 65 MOTION for Attorney Fees filed by Recording Industry Association of America, Inc.. (Attachments: # 1 Affidavit Declaration of Rose Leda Ehler ISO RIAA's Opposition to Plaintiff's Motion to Stay Defendant RIAA's Motion for Attorneys' Fees, # 2 Exhibit A to Ehler Declaration, # 3 Exhibit B to Ehler Declaration, # 4 Exhibit C to Ehler Declaration, # 5 Exhibit D to Ehler Declaration, # 6 Exhibit E to Ehler Declaration, # 7 Exhibit F to Ehler Declaration)(Ehler, Rose) (Entered: 12/22/2022) 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9
68 4 Gru 2022 ORDER granting nunc pro tunc 66 Motion for Extension of Time to File Response/Reply re 65 Motion for Attorney Fees. Signed by Judge Stefan R. Underhill on 12/5/2022. (Hurley, S.) (Entered: 12/05/2022)
— 4 Gru 2022  
View all 109 filings
Wyróżnienie
GHTD powiedział(a):
Unironically a good way to save the software.

@Null, you should see if you could archive these images and/or the youtube-dl software to further the Streisand effect going on with this software.
Kliknij, aby rozwinąć...
The problem is always going to be updating it, not getting any one specific version of the code to people.

youtube-dl is constantly being made obsolete by changes to the sites it downloads from. Its been able to keep up with these changes by being open sourced and having a feature that allows it to download updates from a static location.

If youtube-dl is to continue being a useful tool, it needs both a place for open source developers to contribute to, and a static place for users to download compiled updates from.
 
Bob Barker powiedział(a):
The problem is always going to be updating it, not getting any one specific version of the code to people.

youtube-dl is constantly being made obsolete by changes to the sites it downloads from. Its been able to keep up with these changes by being open sourced and having a feature that allows it to download updates from a static location.

If youtube-dl is to continue being a useful tool, it needs both a place for open source developers to contribute to, and a static place for users to download compiled updates from.
Kliknij, aby rozwinąć...

I mean, he could do it occasionally instead of just updating it all the time. I just want to laugh at the RIAA trying to take the many, many mirrors down at this point.

Speaking of which, I just setup a mirror to further the Streisand effect, if you're interested: https://fuck-music-parasites.com/
 
Ostatnio edytowane:
GHTD powiedział(a):
I mean, he could do it occasionally instead of just updating it all the time. I just want to laugh at the RIAA trying to take the many, many mirrors down at this point.

Speaking of which, I just setup a mirror to further the Streisand effect, if you're interested: https://fuck-music-parasites.com/
Kliknij, aby rozwinąć...
That's the issue though, its not 1 guy maintaining it and its not optional how frequently "he" updates.

The strength of the open source model of youtube-dl is that if google changes the way youtube works, any nerd who notices can create a patch and apply to have it added to youtube-dl. The maintainers then simply have to verify it works and accept it. This also applies to the hundreds of other sites youtube-dl supports.

If youtube-dl can't harness that autism it makes the whole project a lot more difficult to keep functioning. Additionally, just updating every few months isn't really an option because if google changes how they host videos youtube-dl needs to push an update right away or else the whole program is useless.
 

Załączniki

  • Screenshot_2020-11-04_20-56-17.png
    Screenshot_2020-11-04_20-56-17.png
    25,8 KB · Wyświetlenia: 209
Copy/pasted from the other thread:

GitHub reinstates youtube-dl library after EFF intervention​

GitHub also establishes a $1 million "developer defense fund" to help open source developers fight against abusive DMCA Section 1201 takedown claims.

GitHub has reinstated today the youtube-dl open-source project, a Python library that lets users download the source audio and video files behind YouTube videos.

GitHub, a code-hosting repository, had previously removed the library from its portal after it received a controversial DMCA takedown request from the Recording Industry Association of America (RIAA) on October 23.

In a DMCA takedown letter, RIAA argued that the library was being used to "circumvent the technological protection measures used by authorized streaming services such as YouTube" and to allow users to "reproduce and distribute music videos and sound recordings [...] without authorization."

RIAA also noted that the project's source code "expressly suggests its use to copy and/or distribute the following copyrighted works."

More specifically, RIAA used Section 1201 of the Digital Millennium Copyright Act (DMCA) to claim that the youtube-dl library was breaking copyright by providing a tool to circumvent copyrighted material — even if the youtube-dl library didn't contain copyright-infringing code itself.

PROJECT REINSTATED AFTER EFF LETTER​

But in a blog post today, GitHub said the library did not actually break Section 1201 of the DMCA, citing a letter it received from Electronic Frontier Foundation lawyers, who to take up the youtube-dl project's case.

In the letter, the EFF team explained that Google does not have any technical measures in place to prevent the download of its videos — all of which need to be made freely available to all kinds of apps, browsers, smart TVs, and more.

Hence, EFF lawyers argued that the library could never be taken down under Section 1201 of the DMCA since the library doesn't actually circumvent any sort of copyright protection system in the first place.

GITHUB ESTABLISHES A DEVELOPER DEFENSE FUND​

The entire youtube-dl case caught the eye of the entire open-source community ever since GitHub's October enforcement. Many developers and legal experts felt that RIAA had abused the DMCA mechanism to take down a perfectly legitimate tool.

In an editorial, the Freedom of the Press Foundation argued that the library had many legitimate use cases, with the library being an essential tool for developers, journalists, and internet archivists alike.

The open-source community protested GitHub's decision by re-uploading the library hundreds of times on the site and even used bugs in the GitHub platform to append the youtube-dl source code to the actual RIAA's takedown notice.

GitHub got egg on its face after it had to enforce the DMCA takedown, going as far as warning users that they risk having their accounts banned by its automated systems if they continue re-uploading the code on the site.

But GitHub Senior Manager of Policy Abby Vollmer said today that GitHub had no choice and had to follow the law. Nonetheless, the entire youtube-dl takedown disaster has been a learning opportunity for the company.

Vollmer said that GitHub has decided to establish a $1 million "developer defense fund" that the company plans to use to protect developers against "unwarranted DMCA Section 1201 takedown claims."

"Developers who want to push back against unwarranted takedowns may face the risk of taking on personal liability and legal defense costs. To help them, GitHub will establish and donate $1M to a developer defense fund to help protect open source developers on GitHub from unwarranted DMCA Section 1201 takedown claims," Vollmer said.

Furthermore, Vollmer said GitHub will also hire technical and legal experts, along with independent specialists, who will from now on review all DMCA Section 1201 takedown claims going forward to ensure they're compliant with the DMCA and to protect open-source developers from needless litigation.

"All of this will be done at our own cost and at no cost to the developers who use GitHub. We believe this represents the gold standard in developer-first 1201 claims handling," Vollmer added.
 
Will this affect the suit being brought by Yout? That one is separate from the Youtube-dl shenanigans despite happening at a similar time, and appears to be over the RIAA's attempts to have Yout delisted from Google.
 
Leonard Helplessness powiedział(a):
Will this affect the suit being brought by Yout? That one is separate from the Youtube-dl shenanigans despite happening at a similar time, and appears to be over the RIAA's attempts to have Yout delisted from Google.
Kliknij, aby rozwinąć...
I doubt it. This was a change on GitHub's part, and since the Yout case doesn't involve GitHub in any way, I don't think it has an effect on anything from Yout's perspective.
 
I thought I was the only one who first checked the unit tests of whatever software I use to see what the intended use is.
 

Załączniki

TorrentFreak: Brazilian Criminal Court Convicts Yout.com Owner in Landmark Stream Ripping Case (archive) (mega)
The owner of popular U.S.-based stream-ripping site Yout.com has been found guilty of massive copyright infringement by a criminal court in Brazil. Last week, the court sentenced American citizen Johnathan Nader to a prison term of three years and four months, which is substituted by a financial penalty. The verdict is a landmark victory for the major record labels and is believed to be the first criminal conviction against a dedicated YouTube-ripping service.
Kliknij, aby rozwinąć...
A copy of the verdict, issued by Judge Eva Lobo Chaib Dias Jorge of the 12th Criminal Court of São Paulo, is available in Portuguese here.
Kliknij, aby rozwinąć...
 
Wyróżnienie
Musisz się zalogować lub zarejestrować, aby odpowiedzieć.
Wstecz
Top Na dole