Is Downloading And Converting A YouTube Video To An MP3 Infringement?
from the interesting-legal-questions dept
There are a variety of different tools out there that let you "record" a YouTube video and turn it into an MP3, just as there are a variety of tools out there for converting Pandora streams to MP3s or converting internet radio to MP3s. Technically it's no different than "recording" something you hear off the radio, which is generally considered legal under the Audio Home Recording Act (which had plenty of bad things in it, but also included protections for people recording at home for personal use).We may get a test of whether or not that applies to the online world, with the news that former Gnutella P2P client MP3Rocket has changed strategies and ditched its P2P offering to switch to an app that simply records YouTube videos and turns them into MP3s. The company seems to be relying on the Supreme Court's Betamax ruling, by claiming that since all it's really doing is "time shifting" the ability to listen to music streamed via YouTube, it's no different than the ruling that said it was okay to record television shows via video cassettes.
Of course, RIAA supporters and the like will quickly counter by pointing to the various lawsuits over whether or not XM's recording device was legal. Most of those lawsuits ended in settlements, so I don't think there's as strong a precedent that says that turning digital streams is infringement. However, you'd have to imagine that there's going to be one hell of a lawsuit either way.
The reality is that this is yet another case of the law not being able to keep up with technology. There simply is no intellectually honest rationale that says recording songs off the radio is legal, but recording songs off your computer is illegal. It's a weak attempt by an industry that doesn't want to deal with changing technology to put in place laws that prevent what the technology allows. Those never work.
It certainly would be nice to see the Supreme Court note that something like this really is no different than the Betamax ruling, but given the Supreme Court's various bad copyright rulings over the last few years, I have little faith that it will do so. Instead, it would likely just use a case like this to chip further away at the Betamax ruling, just as the Grokster decision did.
Thank you for reading this Techdirt post. With so many things competing for everyone’s attention these days, we really appreciate you giving us your time. We work hard every day to put quality content out there for our community.
Techdirt is one of the few remaining truly independent media outlets. We do not have a giant corporation behind us, and we rely heavily on our community to support us, in an age when advertisers are increasingly uninterested in sponsoring small, independent sites — especially a site like ours that is unwilling to pull punches in its reporting and analysis.
While other websites have resorted to paywalls, registration requirements, and increasingly annoying/intrusive advertising, we have always kept Techdirt open and available to anyone. But in order to continue doing so, we need your support. We offer a variety of ways for our readers to support us, from direct donations to special subscriptions and cool merchandise — and every little bit helps. Thank you.
–The Techdirt Team
Filed Under: betamax, downloading, mp3s, recording, time shifting, youtube
Companies: mp3rocket, youtube
Reader Comments
Subscribe: RSS
View by: Time | Thread
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re:
We`ve had this issues when we launched Softorino YouTube Converter (http://softorino.com/youtube-converter/best-site-downloading-youtube-videos-mp3-files) so there`s no problem if you use it yourself only
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
How it'll be different....
Second, this situation will be said to be completely different because the internet is involved, and the RIAA is pretty sure that every time you record a YouTube stream as a digital recording, sixteen month-old puppies are personally drowned by Julian Assange....
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: How it'll be different....
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: How it'll be different....
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: How it'll be different....
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: How it'll be different....
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: How it'll be different....
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: Re: How it'll be different....
Worse yet, they will convert the unwitting puppy to an extreme form of Islam, promising it 72 Beggin' Strips in heaven if only they would hide a small amount of detonable formula in a whiskey barrel tied to their coller.
Which is why, as I've said or years, we will all eventually elect Michael Vick as our President, and he will single-handedly save us all from the imminent evil of bearded Al Queda Shih Tzus and their insatiable appetite for bacon flavored almost-meat. He will stand at the forefront of this great battle, shirtless, in a Philidelphia Eagles helmet on his head, The King James Bible in one hand and the American flag in the other, and he will resolutely strangle the life out of every last one of these enemy combarkants, as is the will of the American People.
The day is coming, my friends, when you will turn to all of those wierd women you know who own cats, possibly the world's most creepiest animal, and you will look upon them with favor, recalling the great Puppy Terror Scare and its propulsion of President Vick, also called Captain Eyebrows, to the highest office in the land....
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: Re: Re: How it'll be different....
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: How it'll be different....
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: How it'll be different....
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: How it'll be different....
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: How it'll be different....
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
How it'll be different....
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: How it'll be different....
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: How it'll be different....
Terrorists, your game is through
Because you have to answer to... AMERICA!!!
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: Re: Re: How it'll be different....
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: Re: How it'll be different....
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: How it'll be different....
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: How it'll be different....
not only the internets but also mp3's. uploading mp3's to the internets destroyed all music. imagine what recording mp3s directly from the internets will do.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: How it'll be different....
just look at all the ruined musicians who spawned from the internet,
deamau5, abney park, steal 4 ram;(feel free to list more so we cant sue google when they link to them, and not u for linking them)
all for them releasing their work like commies tho peer to peer torrent sites like groove shark, and internet radio sites like the pirate bay(its like hell only worse)
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: How it'll be different....
I know to the owners they probably are....
And, I do agree that it's no different than me, back in the early 80's when I was in HS, using my dual cassette deck to record directly from the radio. It's just newer technology allowing me to do the same.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Something seems different
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Something seems different
Certainly I am not alone is this action.
As it could be claimed the 'normal' (or 'reasonable person') only listens to the music and does not watch after the first few times, there may likely be a good basis for disputing the "changing it's use" argument.
Just saying.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Something seems different
So, what you're saying is that it was implicit in the Betamax decision that when playing back your recording, you would be strapped into your chair with your eyelids taped open so that you would see the video as well as hear the audio.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Something seems different
Also, there are at least two intellectually honest ways of distinguishing the AHRA. First, digital copies are different than copies from analog radio because there is no loss in quality in each generation. Second, the AHRA was a legislative compromise among different interest groups, and there is no equivalent compromise in place that would apply to this type of recording.
That doesn't necessarily mean a contributory infringement case would win, but it does mean neither Betamax nor the AHRA are the end-all, be-all for this case.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
If this lawsuit occurs and is won ...
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
If I see an advantage to spend storage space instead of continuous bandwidth I will record it. With internet radio, there is also the factor or randomness, as I don't know when if ever, I'll have the chance to listen to that specific music again.
I see no difference between doing that, and the red button on my VCR remote, on my DVR device, on my Cassete Tape recorder.
On YouTube, you have even another thing to consider, you don't know how long that video is going to be available, or if it's going to be crippled.
I don't resell the recording, don't share them, and absolutely don't advertise them. Only use they have is my own private enjoyment. Of course I could buy any of those works, but, what's the fun in that? Have any of you ever climbed a tree to get some fruit only because the act of doing that made the fruit taste better then any other? I see it in that same light. Those recordings may lack professional quality, may be incomplete, but, each of them has a much more personalized touch then a bought product that only involves having the necessary money to obtain it.
Hopefully I made my point clear enough.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re:
FTFY
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
But the real story of course, is that thanks to the increasingly forceful and effective anti-piracy measures taken by the US, this company decided to abandon the business of blatant copyright infringement.
The emerging trend is plain as day, and it's not in favor of the pirates.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re:
well, other than posts like this...
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re:
But the real story of course, is that thanks to overly draconian copyright laws used to protect something as unsubstantial as entertainment content, the overall population is seeing less and less reasons to follow the laws.
The emerging trend is plain as day, and it's in favour of the majority, not the tiny minority.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re:
6 billion of us and a couple hundred thousand of them. I am wondering who will win this ... ;)
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re:
In the beginning of the current administration, they said that these RIAA types at the DOJ will not be able to do anything for their industry for six month. I snickered ... my list of what they would do after six months consisted of. Web site seizures (domain name in this case), criminal charges against infringers, jail time for infringers, loss of internet access for infringers, examples being made in a very public way with press releases and perp walks.
Here is why this will fail. Every time ICE or HomeSEC or DOJ is asked if this is legal, they do an end run around the question. They do this because people are pointing out things like, the copyright clause, the 1st, 4th, 14th amendments, prior restraint, etc.
All in all it is only a short term victory that will get slapped down by the courts.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re:
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: Re:
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: Re: Re:
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: Re:
What's that definition of insanity? Doing the same thing over and over, yet expecting different results?
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: Re: Re:
Stupidity actually ...
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: Re:
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re:
Please. Name one - just one - "anti-piracy" measure that has been effective. I certainly can't think of one. I can think of many that have been counter-productive and caused many negative unintended consequences, but effective? No.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re:
Ooo, I got one!
All of the old celluloid movies rotting away in vaults that the owners won't let be copied onto different formats even if someone else pays for it.
Making sure that those aren't copied insures that there's no old content around, so people have to buy new content. That's effective, right?
/sarc
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re:
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re:
There are none (even more so none that US goverment would cook up) as you'll see when "piracy" continues unabated.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Surely, technically it is very different,
I don't recall taping something off the radio by sending the signal to a third party to do the taping and having them deliver the finished recorded off air product to me.
nonetheless it is effectively no different,
the music is being "broadcast" legally and the copier ends up with a copy for their own personal use.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re:
The entire contents of the video has to be completely saved onto your local hard drive before/during play. If you knew what you were doing, you could just rip it straight from your own browser cache.
Now, it being a video on your local drive, you can do whatever with it. And ripping the audio out of a video into an audio-only format is one of the easier thing to do.
This app does nothing but simplify the process for the average user who has no clue how his computer works.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re:
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Real Player
I love my free, legitimately acquired Real Player tools...
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Real Player
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Technically, it is different, in that that recordings from the radio (most radio, anyway) are not purely digital recordings that suffer no loss.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re:
There is nothing in the law that says only lossy recordings are allowed.
In any case we are talking about a on shot record here - not repeated recording of multiple generations. Analogue recording can be pretty good at one generation - and some of the recorders that were around when the law was written would have been better quality than current digital recordings.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re:
Nor did I say otherwise, but if he's going to preface something with "technically," he should not say the exact opposite of what is technically accurate.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: Re:
Unless, of course, his intent is to distort reality to advance his agenda. We all know Mike would never do that, though. :)
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re:
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re:
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re:
Are you suggesting it's illegal to have a PVR box to record TV because it directly encodes a digital stream on a hard drive?
Or worse, before CDs I typically always used tape, but equally always had records and made my own tapes from them because the quality of the commercially produced tapes was so dire. Are you suggesting that because the quality of my recording was better than the commercial offering it suddenly because illegal?
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
What about streaming services ?
I frequently use TotalRecorder to record dial in conference calls/webinars from Skype so I can listen at my leisure when walking the dog in the woods. Is that fair use ?
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Yes, it is an infringement
4. General Use of the Service—Permissions and Restrictions
YouTube hereby grants you permission to access and use the Service as set forth in these Terms of Service, provided that:
1. You agree not to distribute in any medium any part of the Service or the Content without YouTube's prior written authorization, unless YouTube makes available the means for such distribution through functionality offered by the Service (such as the Embeddable Player).
2. You agree not to alter or modify any part of the Service.
3. You agree not to access Content through any technology or means other than the video playback pages of the Service itself, the Embeddable Player, or other explicitly authorized means YouTube may designate.
http://www.youtube.com/t/terms
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Yes, it is an infringement
The issue is not distribution.
The "Service", which is probably defined in the terms, is likely the mechanism of the streaming and displaying. Not hacking Youtube = probably not altering "The Service"
"The Content" could be defined as the entire Audio/Visual/layered package delivered from youtube. Once re-created into an mp3, it is no longer "The Content" that was delivered. This seems to be more a provision to explicitly lock-out frame-grabbing overlays or "youtube ad-remover" scripts.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: Yes, it is an infringement
It looks like 3 will trip them up.
Google V MP3Rocket coming soon...
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: Yes, it is an infringement
In addition to the general restrictions above, the following restrictions and conditions apply specifically to your use of Content.
1. The Content on the Service, and the trademarks, service marks and logos ("Marks") on the Service, are owned by or licensed to YouTube, subject to copyright and other intellectual property rights under the law.
2. Content is provided to you AS IS. You may access Content for your information and personal use solely as intended through the provided functionality of the Service and as permitted under these Terms of Service. You shall not download any Content unless you see a “download” or similar link displayed by YouTube on the Service for that Content. You shall not copy, reproduce, distribute, transmit, broadcast, display, sell, license, or otherwise exploit any Content for any other purposes without the prior written consent of YouTube or the respective licensors of the Content. YouTube and its licensors reserve all rights not expressly granted in and to the Service and the Content."
http://www.youtube.com/t/terms
It is a pretty big page and I did not feel like pasting it all here. I suggest you read the page through the link provided.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Yes, it is an infringement
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Yes, it is an infringement
Technical fail. The video playback pages are not a technology for accessing the services - arguably neither is the embeddable player.
The technology that you use to access YouTube is
1. Your computer
2. Your OS
3. Your browser
These are not mentioned - so either
a) The terms of service don't (strictly) actually allow you to access YouTube at all.
b) You are allowed to do more or less what you like within your own machine and the terms of service are apply only to pubic activities using YouTube content on the web.
The reason for this may be that they attempted to write a legal TOS that, for techinical reasons, is unwriteable.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: Yes, it is an infringement
I intentionally included a link. I suggest people read the page, including section 5, instead of trying to pick apart a partial sentence.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Yes, it is an infringement
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: Yes, it is an infringement
http://www.techdirt.com/articles/20110208/01511613004/is-downloading-converting-youtube-vid eo-to-mp3-infringement.shtml#c596
Definition of INFRINGEMENT
1
: the act of infringing : violation
http://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/infringement
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: Re: Yes, it is an infringement
But it doesn't really answer my point... unless I missed yours... were you saying that this is Copyright Infringement, or were you using "infringement" to mean a violation of TOS and not CRI?
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: Re: Re: Yes, it is an infringement
I never mentioned copyright.
I used to think that I couldn't care less about copyright, but I was wrong, I care less about it everyday.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Yes, it is an infringement
I'm with you now.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
duplicate comment but now formatted
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
format problem
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Who needs an app?
(1) Buffer YouTube video all the way.
(2) Copy file out of /tmp/ folder.
(3) Run file through sound converter.
(4) ???
(5) Profit!
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Who needs an app?
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: Who needs an app?
In Linux people would probably use strace to find out what the program is accessing because it shows you what folders it is trying to access along with other information, on Windows there are similar apps like StraceNT.
Google hint: system call tracer for windows
Also on Linux one could use Tomoyo which is really handy for that kind of thing since it shows in gory details everything a program try to do and access.
But people mostly don't care about that they just use one of the thousands of apps that sniff out the link to the flv or mp4 file directly and download that.
e.g.:
CNET: Youtube Downloader
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: Who needs an app?
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Recording Digital Music with DirectTV & DishTV DVRs
How is personal non-commercial recording digital music from an Internet broadcast legal different than recording music from a satellite broadcast?
Does the RIAA get to make up new rules as they go along?
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
looks
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
just cus
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
downloading music from youtube
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: downloading music from youtube
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Stupid Internet
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
The final YouTube to MP3 downloader
It downloads HD1080p videos and 320kbps MP3s.
Downloads videos with its built in download accelerator, achieving speeds of 3 to 5 times faster than your default web browser.
Also let's me trim the downloaded MP3s, so I can cut the nonsense dialogue out so I am only left with the actual song. Guys who download from YouTube to MP3 know what I mean!
Seriously, check it out!
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: lol cosplay
Therefore, we (me and my worms) call bs. Have a vote!
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
youtube downloader
it is fast and even cool for long video
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Download YouTube Videos
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
RE : free mp3 downloader
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Youtube to Mp3converter
It is a fast way to convert and download all types of videos from YouTube and other websites, for free of cost.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
y
[ link to this | view in chronology ]