• MountingSuspicion@reddthat.com
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    8
    ·
    21 hours ago

    Devastating that Apple did this and still manages to have the worst AI out there. Was really hoping it was so far behind because it only used “ethical” or licensed data. I guess it’s bad just because. That’s extra embarrassing.

  • TehPers@beehaw.org
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    23
    arrow-down
    1
    ·
    edit-2
    2 days ago

    The lawsuit says Apple did more than just link to content. It claims Apple got around YouTube’s protections to download and use videos directly. The creators argue this breaks the Digital Millennium Copyright Act, which bans getting past systems meant to protect copyrighted material.

    Nah they can lose that lawsuit fuck that. Not about to see DMCA section 1201 used to block everyone from using a YouTube video ever in any other content.

    • Powderhorn@beehaw.org
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      12
      ·
      2 days ago

      Hey, tech companies: How about you go back to making shit we actually want instead of circular financing and enshittification? It seemed to work pretty well for decades, and you built goodwill.

      I remember thinking Amazon, like Tom, was my friend.

    • t3rmit3@beehaw.org
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      1
      ·
      edit-2
      4 hours ago

      Unfortunately, yes.

      Facebook v Power Ventures is probably the strongest anti-scraping ruling, because it held that a simple CAPTCHA is sufficient to qualify as “bypassing technical measures” so as to qualify as hacking under CFAA.

      YouTube has a number of technical controls to prevent downloading, and it’s always been considered iffy to mass-download YT vids because all the downloader tools (usually) incorporate some kind of means to bypass their protection schemes.