• Hosting the original youtube-dl sources on salsa?

    From Hayden Barnes@21:1/5 to rbrito@ime.usp.br on Thu Oct 29 23:00:01 2020
    Rogério,

    First, thank you for maintaining youtube-dl.

    Second, I get your concern, especially since one of your forks was listed.

    In general I think my advice would be to not do anything right now.

    There are grounds to challenge the takedown as DMCA overreach. [1] I
    think GitHub is going to support such a challenge. [2] So you will
    want to see how that plays out.

    It has been suggested there may be ways to avoid the alleged
    infringement by removing links and comments that could be seen as
    "promoting" copyright infringement, which may be something you should
    consider in the future.

    You could bring your own challenge for the removal of your fork, but I
    think the prudent move is to wait and see what upstream does, they
    likely have more resources going their way and a strategy, e.g.
    challenging, modifying code, etc.

    So my suggestion would be to wait and see for now.

    As a maintainer I would recommend against re-uploading "youtube-dl" to
    GitHub in any way since it was already the subject of one takedown, at
    least until there is more clarity on the situation. [3]

    But I do not see the need to remove anything else from GitHub, like "pkg-youtube-dl", or salsa at this time.

    Others should weigh in.


    Hayden Barnes

    1: https://www.techdirt.com/articles/20201023/19035045569/riaa-tosses-bogus-claim-github-to-get-video-downloading-software-removed.shtml
    2: https://torrentfreak.com/riaas-youtube-dl-takedown-ticks-of-developers-and-githubs-ceo-201027/
    3: As a private citizen, I made my own fork of youtube-dl on GitHub in protest.

    On Thu, Oct 29, 2020 at 4:18 PM Rogério Brito <rbrito@ime.usp.br> wrote:

    Dear people,

    As many of you may know, the RIAA issued a resquest for GitHub to take down the youtube-dl repository.

    The tree had some fixes that were *not* in the latest release that I
    uploaded a few days ago (I am the maintainer of youtube-dl in Debian, just
    to make things clear).

    Since the tree was taken down (and, to boot, of the 18 forks listed in the takedown request, mine was explicitly listed), I fear that me uploading the lastest tree to GitHub is asking for trouble.

    Given this situation, can I upload a backup of youtube-dl to salsa under my user account? I already maintain the packaging of youtube-dl in a different repository that is both on GitHub and on salsa. Should I take it down from salsa?

    If these are not the appropriate mailing lists to send this to, please point me to better places. I was in a hurry and I decided to send this as soon as
    I found out places that seemed suitable.



    Thanks for any help and support,

    Rogério Brito.

    --
    Rogério Brito : rbrito@{ime.usp.br,gmail.com} : GPG key 4096R/BCFCAAAA http://cynic.cc/blog/ : github.com/rbrito : profiles.google.com/rbrito DebianQA: http://qa.debian.org/developer.php?login=rbrito%40ime.usp.br


    --- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
    * Origin: fsxNet Usenet Gateway (21:1/5)
  • From Daniel Leidert@21:1/5 to All on Fri Oct 30 02:30:01 2020
    Am Donnerstag, den 29.10.2020, 16:59 -0300 schrieb Rogério Brito:

    As many of you may know, the RIAA issued a resquest for GitHub to take down the youtube-dl repository.
    [..]
    Given this situation, can I upload a backup of youtube-dl to salsa under my user account? I already maintain the packaging of youtube-dl in a different repository that is both on GitHub and on salsa. Should I take it down from salsa?

    Debian distributes youtube-dl and its sources anyway and has the package on every mirror. You can also search the codebase on codesearch.d.n. Salsa ist just one more place. If there is a complaint regarding the package it has to be directed to the project anyway and then probably all other distributions are affected too. I don't think you have to do anything at the moment. A specific request had been sent to github not to you.

    My opinion.

    Regards, Daniel
    --
    Regards,
    Daniel Leidert <dleidert@debian.org> | https://www.wgdd.de/
    GPG-Key RSA4096 / BEED4DED5544A4C03E283DC74BCD0567C296D05D
    GPG-Key ED25519 / BD3C132D8B3805D1808123AB7ACE00941E338C78

    If you like my work consider sponsoring me via https://www.patreon.com/join/dleidert

    -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----

    iQIzBAABCgAdFiEEvu1N7VVEpMA+KD3HS80FZ8KW0F0FAl+baakACgkQS80FZ8KW 0F0lrxAA1CXgKg/ybDXXO506iQ/P7F3QM19/pLvYflxqlrOQL7mtXkv9EBhLaw+F 6gZK4kRUYyvl8BV0QZZbb88FADzIlmGXE4Be7uCdCKzegQzC2gv+TqWn7emuWq80 7DBLqE8c4CvXB7qbb5XOQDdXtqahUpXGFaMso12AaTc4ONDLaIy3/dbfUXw20n1O VHwCIwZhDDlf2NdRIzWdrTQWwIQ+rU3H5iPDv9GN6l80MA0JXMNys7HoxjfXhMWl at3Jl1GBlEfBO/rNq6xzrSiuWIDjZgkv+VlxRTyK0foS+wX8+m7DkIKtE/GfNe3d 1gnbmw9kr2jpZ2Xvok3e8Qww+D650hMy3zepVxJ7nwWhk7c2xal0mh7prZvH5pk1 Und7NGKtA4ObqoCSgQOyfETJWXsSimAi44YiL9KqI2RTt1KVKghSe1x8zKJocj/p L+5Jy4BidcANqSgrPu7IAQs0yaPiBwVClrENLAOZh+4rpTqn4PLbcclheIkH1Z3u ezekGuHikmx1HH39dOD6tq3p310X5fhlM4kvTb/CwzQbew/cEqvuAydoCEPLUOjK i/dnwJ27BmjGVa7POxnZXHmyuVRFRdCbNngIodRA/Bm9
  • From Pierre-Elliott =?utf-8?B?QsOpY3Vl?=@21:1/5 to All on Fri Oct 30 11:30:01 2020
    XPost: linux.debian.devel

    Le jeudi 29 octobre 2020 16:59:53-0300, Rogrio Brito a crit:
    Dear people,

    As many of you may know, the RIAA issued a resquest for GitHub to take down the youtube-dl repository.

    The tree had some fixes that were *not* in the latest release that I
    uploaded a few days ago (I am the maintainer of youtube-dl in Debian, just
    to make things clear).

    Since the tree was taken down (and, to boot, of the 18 forks listed in the takedown request, mine was explicitly listed), I fear that me uploading the lastest tree to GitHub is asking for trouble.

    Given this situation, can I upload a backup of youtube-dl to salsa under my user account? I already maintain the packaging of youtube-dl in a different repository that is both on GitHub and on salsa. Should I take it down from salsa?

    If these are not the appropriate mailing lists to send this to, please point me to better places. I was in a hurry and I decided to send this as soon as
    I found out places that seemed suitable.



    Thanks for any help and support,

    I support your idea.

    I cc the DPL and Salsa Team out of principle to just make sure they
    are aware of your email. The DPL being the closest thing we have for a
    legal representative of Debian (if we were to get sued), and the Salsa
    team because they run salsa and they deserve at least to be notified.

    Cheers!

    --
    Pierre-Elliott Bcue
    GPG: 9AE0 4D98 6400 E3B6 7528 F493 0D44 2664 1949 74E2
    It's far easier to fight for one's principles than to live up to them.

    -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----

    iQIzBAABCgAdFiEESYqTBWsFJgT6y8ijKb+g0HkpCsoFAl+b6BwACgkQKb+g0Hkp Csrr3hAAt3xPZY5UWE6vcOBp44TKENlWX/DlS687Nq4+ND2tlAw6rLZNOUU5fOqe KnNF49YqdYsqgpyu7QdOk+T3ebHuLfOnDSat07Wck9iEXT14zjyT4B1lh/n4Mfh1 rCj/Tp/HHBVSaoBCUKUHAG5mOq2/q5Knr9lJ8f/hWJG5wDdCyyxV45sct0ehICi3 VuKr+Lb8R9sDj6f4jfxUHMg79OlplBY3Z0CC2AaoH093rL8HeDJ51MHGvx82iJWG MkWvnxL0Z8tUHw8pYxjTa5isIzYyc0gdxDfXqd3x8zui85ONOdiIDPZjKN9bgMrx mGZP3ALtFyvcloM0+5guDkZdd5Mjbww8JT+ZdUf4V1WJDirqrTpPdn6L2Dc7SjCw Nzo8RbIiw0Q5jr6+ltXwpa0KBNahs98ovqmohzb/v6Igqg92hp148iMuslN9/Ffk Q73gl0Kf5aMVYMgYMFag0FhtEQN9naUN651ijeqGXEX62JYEsgmWA9rS7Z3tC+/+ 6Lr+n1/VuD0aoiNLLvmkp3X5+4v8o7XNVMIpD1j7fnzad9EkeilgYnepXQVzwHRh OKA+glXoq9cYGLiB8IVMlwyx1q+XtWlhZbIx9625IG7C99qqjSoUFZwDuObNaHFk XAUDcV59scqysO1o1M5nbGN924nxBkGsNcjJ6Ln55ckMD9LL5Z4=
    =S/S5
    -----END PGP SIGNATURE-----

    --- SoupGate-Wi
  • From Roberto@21:1/5 to Dominik George on Fri Oct 30 12:50:02 2020
    On Thu, Oct 29, 2020 at 11:15:34PM +0100, Dominik George wrote:
    The RIAA seems to be targeting the most vulnerable and leat likely to
    defend themselves, otherweise they would be targeting those who upload content violating copyright laws instead on free software maintainers.

    (Also, there is YouTube Premium which allows for downloading any video
    ypu like, so in the view of the RIAA, why is that acceptable?).

    I think that the issue is *not* about content uploaded to youtube
    without permission. Youtube has licensed music, for example try to
    search for any famous song, like Bohemian Rhapsody. There are official
    music videos and many unofficial ones uploaded by personal accounts,
    both of them are legally permitted because the music is licensed by
    YouTube. You can see that the unofficial videos also contain a notice in
    the description that says "Licensed to YouTube by ..." and a list of
    music publishers and copyright holders.

    YouTube is paying for those permissions, and the money comes from 1) ads
    on normal YouTube or 2) subscriptions on YouTube Premium. YouTube
    Premium users have permission to download the music as well (for their
    personal offline use) because they are paying to the music rights
    societies, in a similar way that other companies like Spotify are doing.

    RIAA sees youtube-dl as a software that allows people to access their
    licensed content with the same privileges as their paying users, but
    without paying. And that's why the DMCA enters here, because youtube-dl
    is seen as a software that allows "circumvention of technological
    barriers for using a digital good in certain ways which the
    rightsholders do not wish to allow" [1]

    [1] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Anti-circumvention

    I personally was very upset about the takedown of youtube-dl, I just
    want to clarify a bit what is this issue about.

    --- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
    * Origin: fsxNet Usenet Gateway (21:1/5)
  • From Hayden Barnes@21:1/5 to hayden.barnes@canonical.com on Mon Nov 16 17:20:02 2020
    Rogério,

    As a handful of us predicted youtube-dl has been reinstated on GitHub:

    https://github.blog/2020-11-16-standing-up-for-developers-youtube-dl-is-back/

    I would remove the problematic tests from your fork to avoid future issues.

    Again, thank you for being a maintainer. I use youtube-dl regularly
    and appreciate your work.

    Let us know if you have any more questions or concerns.

    Hayden Barnes

    On Thu, Oct 29, 2020 at 5:49 PM Hayden Barnes
    <hayden.barnes@canonical.com> wrote:

    Rogério,

    First, thank you for maintaining youtube-dl.

    Second, I get your concern, especially since one of your forks was listed.

    In general I think my advice would be to not do anything right now.

    There are grounds to challenge the takedown as DMCA overreach. [1] I
    think GitHub is going to support such a challenge. [2] So you will
    want to see how that plays out.

    It has been suggested there may be ways to avoid the alleged
    infringement by removing links and comments that could be seen as
    "promoting" copyright infringement, which may be something you should consider in the future.

    You could bring your own challenge for the removal of your fork, but I
    think the prudent move is to wait and see what upstream does, they
    likely have more resources going their way and a strategy, e.g.
    challenging, modifying code, etc.

    So my suggestion would be to wait and see for now.

    As a maintainer I would recommend against re-uploading "youtube-dl" to
    GitHub in any way since it was already the subject of one takedown, at
    least until there is more clarity on the situation. [3]

    But I do not see the need to remove anything else from GitHub, like "pkg-youtube-dl", or salsa at this time.

    Others should weigh in.


    Hayden Barnes

    1: https://www.techdirt.com/articles/20201023/19035045569/riaa-tosses-bogus-claim-github-to-get-video-downloading-software-removed.shtml
    2: https://torrentfreak.com/riaas-youtube-dl-takedown-ticks-of-developers-and-githubs-ceo-201027/
    3: As a private citizen, I made my own fork of youtube-dl on GitHub in protest.

    On Thu, Oct 29, 2020 at 4:18 PM Rogério Brito <rbrito@ime.usp.br> wrote:

    Dear people,

    As many of you may know, the RIAA issued a resquest for GitHub to take down the youtube-dl repository.

    The tree had some fixes that were *not* in the latest release that I uploaded a few days ago (I am the maintainer of youtube-dl in Debian, just to make things clear).

    Since the tree was taken down (and, to boot, of the 18 forks listed in the takedown request, mine was explicitly listed), I fear that me uploading the lastest tree to GitHub is asking for trouble.

    Given this situation, can I upload a backup of youtube-dl to salsa under my user account? I already maintain the packaging of youtube-dl in a different
    repository that is both on GitHub and on salsa. Should I take it down from salsa?

    If these are not the appropriate mailing lists to send this to, please point
    me to better places. I was in a hurry and I decided to send this as soon as I found out places that seemed suitable.



    Thanks for any help and support,

    Rogério Brito.

    --
    Rogério Brito : rbrito@{ime.usp.br,gmail.com} : GPG key 4096R/BCFCAAAA http://cynic.cc/blog/ : github.com/rbrito : profiles.google.com/rbrito DebianQA: http://qa.debian.org/developer.php?login=rbrito%40ime.usp.br


    --- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
    * Origin: fsxNet Usenet Gateway (21:1/5)