• AbelianGrape@beehaw.org
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    0
    ·
    edit-2
    1 year ago

    I’ll admit I hadn’t seen that, and that I was just echoing what TheFrenchGhosty said. That sure does look like official API access. They also seem to make calls through that wrapper to access comments and plenty of other things, so it’s not just sitting there unused.

    Thankfully, TheFrenchGhosty is on the Fediverse, so let’s ask them: @[email protected] @[email protected] (not sure which one of these to use) How is this not using an official YouTube API?

    The README and the refute of YouTube’s C&D letter both claim that Invidious doesn’t use YouTube’s APIs at all - not merely that the response creation/interpretation was reverse-engineered. Obviously, the TOS applies to the fact that you interact with the API, not whether you access it manually or with the help of some code pre-prepared by Google. Yet it seems that other people have vetted you and not raised this issue. So I’m assuming we’re simply misunderstanding here, and hoping you can clear it up.

    • TheFrenchGhosty@lemmy.pussthecat.org
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      1
      ·
      edit-2
      1 year ago

      Hello,

      The thing is that the agreement they linked apply to the official YouTube API (the one that you have to register for).

      Invidious uses the InnerTube (a completely different “API” used by all official YouTube clients). Invidious basically acts like a web browser that access the YouTube website. It is therefore not required to agree to any TOS/policies.

      All those findings where done via clean room reverse engineering (which is legal in the EU).

    • eddythompson@beehaw.org
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      0
      ·
      edit-2
      1 year ago

      well, there was a long thread about this on /r/selfhosted where @[email protected] @[email protected] was saying pretty much what I said, but with a tad more mental gymnastics mostly about EU laws regarding reverse engineering and lack of a formal agreement between them and YouTube.

      Unfortunately (or fortunately?), /r/selfhosted is private atm due to the blackout, so I’m unable to find and share thread link.

      The facts are:

      • Invidious (as an OSS project) calls undocumented internal YouTube APIs (they call it InnerTube).
      • Anyone can host an Invidious instance.
      • The main Invidious instance, i.e: https://invidious.io/ received a cease and desist from YouTube.

      @[email protected] @[email protected] posted all about this on GitHub, reddit, their personal blog, and contacted random media outlets like the one linked here, to complain about how “we have nothing to do with YouTube, why is YouTube bullying us”. And since everyone obviously wants to give the little guy the benefit of the doubt, everyone starts wondering how it could be that a project that’s all about providing an alternative UI for YouTube, doesn’t call YouTube.

      It’s like if a movie pirating website is trying to argue

      “Endgame.mp4” is just a file name. It has nothing to do with Marvel or Disney. What the hell are those greedy companies have to do with us??

      I’m all for invidious, piracy, etc. But seriously?

        • eddythompson@beehaw.org
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          0
          ·
          1 year ago

          A torrent tracker doesn’t host anything either. It’s merely a lighthouse for people to know who is hosting it. And trackers are hosted exclusively in certain specific countries because of that.

          • pokexpert30@lemmy.pussthecat.org
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            1
            ·
            1 year ago

            I think the issues with trackers is they were making money out of it? Iirc the trackers themselves, if kept from making a profit are untouchable

            • eddythompson@beehaw.org
              link
              fedilink
              English
              arrow-up
              1
              ·
              1 year ago

              I’m not sure that’s true. Most private trackers accept donations. Some even require you to buy some seedbox plan they get commission from (even though that’s generally frowned upon).

              All the high profile trackers I can think of that were shutdown through legal notice (Mininova, isoHunt, KickassTorrent, ThePirateBay, etc) were all public trackers. Maybe they had ads or something on their website, but their shutdown had nothing to do with them making money. They were shutdown for piracy even though they never “hosted” any content. They were just trackers.

              Hell, even Popcorn Time, a software that just let you easily search torrents and stream them, it hosted nothing, just connected you to trackers that had movies was too shutdown by legal notice.

              Trackers that survive are usually hosted behind VPNs and are physically located in Russia or China.