Hacker News Reader

Comment by Rochus | Hacker News Reader

> the only likely chance of definitively finding out in your territory is to have a criminal action against you and see if you win in court

The plaintiffs would have to prove that the videos that can be downloaded with youtube-dl are protected by an objectively effective technical measure and that the tool circumvents this protection, that the accused was aware of the effectiveness of the measure and the illegality of his actions.

I studied law at the University of Zurich (Switzerland) and would be calm in face of such a criminal prosecution. The plaintiff's risk of litigation would be considerable and the defendant would have little to fear.

View on HN

In Switzerland.

youtube-dl was, and still is, hosted in the U.S. And the DMCA is not as lenient as the laws of Switzerland.

And on that note, neither are the IP treaties that most Western countries have made with each other, Switzerland included.

This subthread is about Switzerland, see above.

And the action is also on thin ice in the USA. The assumptions on which the takedown is based on are very questionable. I am curious to see how the proceedings that have now been initiated will turn out.

No, the RIAA notice is on pretty solid ground in the U.S.

You'll note that organizations like the EFF haven't weighed in on this like they normally do when content owners get overzealous with enforcing IP controls, nor have many of the usual IP law commentators.

And more importantly, the youtube-dl creators would have already filed a response if the RIAA notice was as week as so many people in this thread have claimed; they've had a week to do so. The fact that they've yet to respond indicates that either they or the lawyers they've spent the last week talking to are having difficulty finding a response to the RIAA's notice. (This doesn't mean that they won't file a notice, just that the issue is not a piece of cake like so many people on HN believe.)

Are you a lawyer? Or do you work for the RIAA?

> youtube-dl creators would have already filed a response if the RIAA notice was as week

There was actually a claim filed by a US company affiliated with youtube-dl. See https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=RCrJM-MrKyI.

That isn't a counter claim, it is a lawsuit by a company that isn't affiliated with youtube-dl and the claims of the suit predate the youtube-dl incident.

In 2019, the RIAA got a court order to have Google remove the Yout domains from search results. Yout is arguing that their service provides time shifting, which is fair use, and their domains should be restored on Google search. Plus, they want damages.

FYI -- Yout has been blocked from several ISPs in Europe because courts have found their service to be illegal stream ripping and infringes copyright.

I watched the talk some days ago. You apparently came to another conlusion. Do you have references about the case you mentioned?

Are you hard of hearing? The link you posted has the filing clearly visible in the video. I read it. All claims are based on actions taken in 2019. Not one mention of the youtube-dl DMCA violation.

> Are you hard of hearing?

Yes. Thanks for reminding me.

Filing or not filing a counter-notice isn't just a question of who is legally right, but also of who can afford a litigation. I doubt the youtube-dl authors have the budget to fight this.

The EFF has commented on this:

https://twitter.com/EFF/status/1319787243184123904

"Youtube-dl is a legitimate tool with a world of a lawful uses. Demanding its removal from Github is a disappointing and counterproductive move by the RIAA."

I'm not sure why you're posting misinformation.

Reply on news.ycombinator.com