wow just wow while i can't say i didn't see this one coming but it always amazes me where greed could lead someone
this post was submitted on 01 Jul 2023
1569 points (96.6% liked)
Piracy: ꜱᴀɪʟ ᴛʜᴇ ʜɪɢʜ ꜱᴇᴀꜱ
54716 readers
228 users here now
⚓ Dedicated to the discussion of digital piracy, including ethical problems and legal advancements.
Rules • Full Version
1. Posts must be related to the discussion of digital piracy
2. Don't request invites, trade, sell, or self-promote
3. Don't request or link to specific pirated titles, including DMs
4. Don't submit low-quality posts, be entitled, or harass others
Loot, Pillage, & Plunder
📜 c/Piracy Wiki (Community Edition):
💰 Please help cover server costs.
 |
 |
|---|---|
| Ko-fi | Liberapay |
founded 1 year ago
MODERATORS
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
view the rest of the comments
I will still use invidious while having muy subscriptions saved as RSS feeds so this change will go over my head
let me bring you up to speed a couple days ago YouTube legal team threatened invidious devs saying they are abusing their API ToS ( trems of service ) which the devs said that the claim does not hold any truth to it since invidious is just youtube proxy\scraper and does not depend on API
This just tells me that invidious is in their crosshairs but it is legally safe until YouTube tries taking them to court to create precedent over scraping webpages
We already have precedent that it's entirely legal. Making an argument that individual scraping should be illegal is practically impossible.
Scraping in this context is just accessing a public web resource and rendering it locally. The only difference with a browser is a customized interface.
So to make scrapping illegal they would either make accessing a public web resource illegal (ban the internet) or make formatting the accessed web resource illegal (make it illegal to use any software to view the accessed public web material, including browsers).