Most people have extremely weird ideas of what’s considered piracy and what isn’t. Downloading a video game rom is piracy, but if you pay money to some Chinese retailer for an SD card containing the roms, that’s somehow not piracy. Exploiting the free trial on a streaming site by using prepaid visa cards is somehow not piracy either. Torrenting an album is piracy, but listening to a bootleg on YouTube isn’t.

YouTube noticed this at some point and is now happy to let everyone know how much pirated music is available on their site. One of their main points for shilling YouTube premium is how their music catalogue is way better than Spotify. Of course the piracy site has more. That’s always how it works. Spotify actually has to license the music on their platform and is subject to copyright law. They can’t just get the Neil Young discography from soulseek one day and wait until his estate notices, facing no repercussions whatsoever aside from agreeing to a takedown request. Imagine if Pirate Bay or Napster were considered completely above-board businesses just because they took down torrents if explicitly requested by the copyright holders.

Not that I’m complaining especially when a lot of the music on youtube isn’t publicly accessible anywhere else. It’s just been extremely strange to see this go from an “open secret” to something they’re shouting from the rooftops and face no repercussions for. In the future I want everything to be like that and I’d rather keep youtube how it is than see them get the punishment that by all rights they should be getting. It’s just so strange that this is the position things have ended up in.

Note: The following text is intentional abuse of the tagginator bot. Fuck you.

#ADHD #BOSTON #NYC #OpenSource #FOSS #SelfHosted #Soccer #3dprinting #Memes #GodotEngine #Unity #UnrealEngine

  • CrayonRosary@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    7
    ·
    edit-2
    7 months ago

    You’re missing some key facts:

    1. A lot of music on YouTube is fully licensed and uploaded by the owners or Google themselves. Like VEVO music, for instance.
    2. Google runs a content match algorithm on all uploads to detect music and movies. If you upload more than four seconds of a song, Google will detect it and transfer all monitization of that upload to the rights holder. This is why music documentaries like Trash Theory only have frustratingly short clips of the music they are talking about, and why channels like Techmoan, which documents weird music formats and playback devices, can also only share extremely short clips.

    The rights holders are getting any and all money on music uploaded to YouTube, and your entire premise is flawed.

    • NuXCOM_90Percent@lemmy.zip
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      1
      ·
      7 months ago

      I would also add that google very much understands the implications of streaming music.

      This is speculated to be why you can’t get Youtube Premium without Youtube Music (in most countries?). Because all the license holders would lose their minds if they weren’t getting a cut (and apparently the ad revenue from music videos isn’t enough).

    • Todd Bonzalez@lemm.ee
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      1
      arrow-down
      1
      ·
      12 days ago

      Well, the gigantic pile of low-end audio I ripped using yt-dlp begs to differ. Half a million tracks so far. Perfect for my OpenSwim headphones. Tiny mp3s to maximize my 4GB of storage, and shit quality to match what I’m getting from bone conductors (which are, for no compelling reason, compatible with FLAC).

      I swim a lot, and have a lot of free disk space, so I promise this makes sense.

  • Buffalobuffalo@reddthat.com
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    1
    ·
    edit-2
    7 months ago

    Buying an SD card full of Roms is piracy, that’s why you have to buy it from Chinese companies and not walk down to the Walmart.

    YouTube has agreements with the record companies to pay them for money generated through music uploaded to YouTube. For music where they don’t have an agreement the DMCA means that the uploaded need to verify they have the copyright to thing they upload. Otherwise no social media or file hosting sites could exist.

    • clearleaf@lemmy.worldOP
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      0
      arrow-down
      1
      ·
      7 months ago

      With the SD what you’re talking about is reality but I meant it in terms of normies perceptions. I watched some retro handheld reviews on YouTube and it started surfacing videos about SD cards of retro roms you can buy. There’s always people pointing out that you can just download the same rompack from archive.org, and there are people replying who say that’s piracy. I couldn’t make something like that up if I tried. Here’s another one specifically about YouTube. If you torrent a song, that’s bad. But if you use a YouTube to mp3 website that’s different. My family sees it that way.

      • Aatube@kbin.social
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        2
        ·
        7 months ago

        Your family may be hydrophobiacs.

        (because a torrent is a water stream! get it? hehehehehehehh)

      • SoylentBlake@lemm.ee
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        0
        ·
        7 months ago

        Is pirating old snes and genesis roms really piracy if there’s no other way to get it?

        Roms are the reason half those games are still around and not dead media. The popularity of roms is why Nintendo made the throw back, video game companies roll up all the time, very few have longevity and even if those most would’ve been fine just letting the old games die in obscurity.

        • Railcar8095@lemm.ee
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          2
          ·
          7 months ago

          Legally speaking it’s piracy and copyright infringement.

          Unofficially, it’s a moral obligation to download and seed.

        • clearleaf@lemmy.worldOP
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          0
          ·
          edit-2
          7 months ago

          In the eyes of the law it’s piracy. But to me if something is not being sold, it might as well be public domain. And there’s literally no difference between buying a second hand mario 3 cartridge and pirating the rom in terms of money the creators get. That’s way more ridiculous to me than the youtube thing.

          • SoylentBlake@lemm.ee
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            1
            ·
            7 months ago

            Oh doncha know manufacturers are already working on that.

            The whole subscription economy grift. They’re gonna say you own the basic version arguing against the ‘if you can’t modify it you never really own it’ crowd, until they’ve spent enough money to bribe those in power to fashion their win for them, then they’re gonna turn around and say we never really own anything and make reselling illegal.

            Reselling takes care of itself if you simply stop offering physical media…which, idk…seems to be the trend of the last 15 years, don’t cha think?

  • ∟⊔⊤∦∣≶@lemmy.nz
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    0
    ·
    7 months ago

    I was under the assumption that Youtube had to pay artists for their music being on there? Is that not what is happening?

    And if not, how has Youtube not been cease and desisted/sued into absolute oblivion?

    • TAG@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      0
      arrow-down
      1
      ·
      7 months ago

      YouTube pays the uploader, who double promises that they totally have the the right to the song.

  • Magnus@lemmy.dbzer0.com
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    0
    ·
    7 months ago

    No idea if you have ever uploaded to youtube but I can’t upload audio of my dick slapping my ankle without Disney or universal claiming royalties.