Whats very interesting about this is the huge implications it could have for adblocking. If the labels win on the 'circumvention' clause, the impact could effectively outlaw adblocking. If youtube can say "you can only access our content with a browser that doesnt save the audio portions of our video" then they can also say "you can only access our content with a browser that shows all ads"
Do they actually make 'millions' in ad revenue though? Even if this lawsuit is successful, another site(s) will just replace it.
Taking audio from a youtube video is pretty simple code wise and it'd be a good idea to open source that maybe as a browser extension if someone hasn't already done it.
no. but nothing stops any of these organization's members paying 1m of targeted ads only to that url a month before trial, then automatically: yes, your honor.
Comments
Whats very interesting about this is the huge implications it could have for adblocking. If the labels win on the 'circumvention' clause, the impact could effectively outlaw adblocking. If youtube can say "you can only access our content with a browser that doesnt save the audio portions of our video" then they can also say "you can only access our content with a browser that shows all ads"
Although google does not appear to be a plaintiff here, they have certainly indicated they could be one in the future ( https://torrentfreak.com/google-threatens-to-sue-huge-youtub... )
Do they actually make 'millions' in ad revenue though? Even if this lawsuit is successful, another site(s) will just replace it.
Taking audio from a youtube video is pretty simple code wise and it'd be a good idea to open source that maybe as a browser extension if someone hasn't already done it.
There's a CLI https://github.com/rg3/youtube-dl. Which is possibly used by some of these sites.
no. but nothing stops any of these organization's members paying 1m of targeted ads only to that url a month before trial, then automatically: yes, your honor.