Beta
×

Welcome to the Slashdot Beta site -- learn more here. Use the link in the footer or click here to return to the Classic version of Slashdot.

Thank you!

Before you choose to head back to the Classic look of the site, we'd appreciate it if you share your thoughts on the Beta; your feedback is what drives our ongoing development.

Beta is different and we value you taking the time to try it out. Please take a look at the changes we've made in Beta and  learn more about it. Thanks for reading, and for making the site better!

Google Bars Site That Converts YouTube Songs Into MP3s

timothy posted more than 2 years ago | from the see-previous-article-about-streaming dept.

Google 177

An anonymous reader writes "Google is apparently cracking down on a popular site that converts the music from YouTube videos into MP3s. YouTube-MP3.org has received a letter from Google, YouTube's parent company, notifying the site operators that converting videos this way violates YouTube's terms of service, according to the blog TorrentFreak, which said it has seen the letter. In addition, YouTube apparently has blocked YouTube-MP3.org's servers from accessing the site."

cancel ×

177 comments

Sorry! There are no comments related to the filter you selected.

Google blocks leechers (0, Flamebait)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#40370983)

So what?

Funny block... (-1, Offtopic)

houstonbofh (602064) | more than 2 years ago | (#40371093)

Re:Funny block... (5, Insightful)

Mia'cova (691309) | more than 2 years ago | (#40371439)

They're blocking their servers from downloading the videos. They aren't removing it from their search results. That's exactly what I'd do in their case. They'll simply feed it URLs, see who connects to download the video, block the IP, and repeat.

This seems like a complete non-story to me. But then, I've never heard of that site before. If it is actually popular, I can see why that alone would make it news-worthy. As a technical person, I'd look for a browser plugin to download the video, then a desktop app to rip the audio. Searching for a website which automates the process wouldn't have even occurred to me. It's funny how being technical can cause you to miss the boat on some trends just because the problem addressed was just never a problem for you in the first place..

Re:Funny block... (1, Interesting)

Runaway1956 (1322357) | more than 2 years ago | (#40371839)

Anyone who can't figure out how to download the video for himself, then rip an MP3 from the video, doesn't deserve to listen to the music. Geez, Louise - you don't even have to be a Linux guru to figure this stuff out!

Re:Funny block... (1)

TheRealMindChild (743925) | more than 2 years ago | (#40372033)

Why should I "figure it out" when I can just copy and paste a URL, then click the "download mp3" link?

Re:Funny block... (1)

gman003 (1693318) | more than 2 years ago | (#40372157)

Indeed.

Previously, I have done as the GGP described. Lost the plugin and converter in a reformat (curse you, Windows!), and you know what? It was less of a hassle to just use a website to convert it on those rare occasions that I actually *did* want to download a Youtube video as an MP3, than it would have been to reinstall and configure the special software to do it. I don't do it that often, so I don't need the sort of instant capabilities of a browser plugin.

Re:Funny block... (1)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#40372271)

You don't even need to figure out how to download the video, flash does this for you, it doesn't actually stream, it'll leave copies of the files it "streamed" sitting in the temp folder while the player is still visible.

Re:Funny block... (4, Insightful)

ccguy (1116865) | more than 2 years ago | (#40372371)

Anyone who can't figure out how to download the video for himself, then rip an MP3 from the video, doesn't deserve to listen to the music

That's like saying anyone who can't figure out how to install a tap doesn't deserve water.

This kind of attitude LOWERS the value of technical people. You are basically saying that this is the standard that separate the normal people from the retards.

Re:Funny block... (2)

Runaway1956 (1322357) | more than 2 years ago | (#40372471)

"You are basically saying that this is the standard that separate the normal people from the retards."

Welllllll - let's just say that a lot of elementary school age children can figure it out for themselves. One of whom is closely related to me. I walked in his room, looked over his shoulder, and asked, "What you doing, Son?" "Oh, I like this song, so I'm piping it through VLC and saving the audio so that I can play it back on my iPod."

My answer? "Son, you have poor taste in music. Who the hell is this Nickel Back dude? And, why does he sound like he's been smoking raw hemp? Why don't you look for some Foreigner, or Boston, or some other real music?" Of course, this was a few years ago - the boy is out of school now.

Re:Funny block... (2, Informative)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#40371877)

...a desktop app to rip the audio...

No excuse for mousey-clicky, simply type into the command line:

ffmpeg -i my_video_file.avi extracted_audio.mp3

mplayer -dumpaudio my_video_file.avi -dumpfile extracted_audio.mp3

Re:Funny block... (1)

PIBM (588930) | more than 2 years ago | (#40372103)

yeah, that part is easy. Now, from the command line, can you provide something to extract the music from all the video listed at http://www.youtube.com/music [youtube.com] , skipping ads ?

Re:Funny block... (1)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#40372223)

cclive or clive $URL, then the commands above?

Re:Funny block... (1)

PIBM (588930) | more than 2 years ago | (#40372267)

I though it was abandonned, thanks for pointing out it was alive again :)

Re:Funny block... (1)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#40372285)

yeah, that part is easy. Now, from the command line, can you provide something to extract the music from all the video listed at http://www.youtube.com/music [youtube.com] , skipping ads ?

http://rg3.github.com/youtube-dl/documentation.html [github.com]

Re:Funny block... (1)

TheRealMindChild (743925) | more than 2 years ago | (#40372017)

I use(d) these sites when a family member says "can you get me this song on my mp3 player?". I felt, honestly, since the service was out there, especially for so long, that they had some sort of deal worked out and this was a legitimate way to grab popular music (figuring advertising kickback).

K.I.S.S. always wins in this "market" (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#40372445)

It's funny how being technical can cause you to miss the boat on some trends just because the problem addressed was just never a problem for you in the first place.

Truer words were rarely spoken. I would have done it myself, just like you. I had heard of them, but barely knew they existed and the whole concept made me nauseous because I care about quality.

I always go for the best quality possible, not speed and ease of acquisition. But lets face it: you and I and all of the genuine geeks here (and there are a ton of pretenders who post at Slashdot) amount to f***-all - we're not 99.9% of the world.

You have to constantly remind yourself that 99.99% of computer "users" are 10-year-old girls or 30-something techno-duhs.

To them, the computer is just an obnoxious tool (and if they had it their way, it would be invisible or non-existant) and anything that makes it *easier* to use (even if it makes it less flexible than it could be and even if the end-quality is vastly inferior) will naturally attract them.

Microsoft (once the world's most successful crap-marketing company) proved that people will buy sow's ears if the b.s. is strong and price is tolerable. They work on the "there's one born every minute to buy this crap" principle (I often think the world would be much farther ahead technologically if Bill Gates Sr. had only used a condom) and it worked well for them. Good technology - what's that and why should we give a damn?

The bottom line: K.I.S.S. wins again and quality and flexibility be damned.

This seems like a complete non-story to me.

I couldn't agree more. So are most "stories" for which links are posted at Slashdot (and for which Slashdot gets users to post teasers that Slashdot doesn't even fact-check and rarely edits - I don't think Slashdot actually does any work but sell advertising). But Slashdot is a for-profit business and it needs "eyeballs" to sell the advertising. That's all.

How stupid, and useless (3, Informative)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#40370991)

It is trivial to extract the audio from a youtube video and convert it to an mp3. There are tools on Windows, Linux, and OSX that can do that without a lot of effort. So, shutting down this site is, IMO, an exercise in futility.

Re:How stupid, and useless (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#40371039)

>

Re:How stupid, and useless (1)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#40371425)

Don't worry, Windows 8 and its treacherous computing will fix the problem, citizen!

Re:How stupid, and useless (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#40372009)

Hell yeah! Ballmer will see to it that no hippy download free ware sees the light of day in the windows store.

Re:How stupid, and useless (5, Funny)

houstonbofh (602064) | more than 2 years ago | (#40371053)

This seems to be an easier tool for the non-technical to use, and therefore would open it up to a wider audience. Costing record companies billions of dollars and funding terrorism, of course.

Re:How stupid, and useless (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#40371099)

Even worse, if it pushes people who previously used the online solutions in to using downloaded tools, it's putting a lot of users in harms way with regards to malware.

Re:How stupid, and useless (2)

Razgorov Prikazka (1699498) | more than 2 years ago | (#40371229)

<quote><p>[...] it's putting a lot of users in harms way with regards to malware.</p></quote>
AND funding terrorism...
You forgot to add that. FTFY :-D

Re:How stupid, and useless (1)

hawguy (1600213) | more than 2 years ago | (#40371317)

Even worse, if it pushes people who previously used the online solutions in to using downloaded tools, it's putting a lot of users in harms way with regards to malware.

There's got to be a better solution to malware than making everyone use cloud-based services for everything.

Re:How stupid, and useless (1)

oakgrove (845019) | more than 2 years ago | (#40372037)

There is no solution to malware. That's what's so great about it. Give that some thought.

Re:How stupid, and useless (2)

azalin (67640) | more than 2 years ago | (#40371449)

I would presume that Google wants to prevent the RIAA throwing another fit. They do this by going for an obvious leecher that probably started to cost them money bandwidth wise, infringes their trademark and would become bothersome if it became too popular.
I'm pretty sure they know that is impossible to stop the not completely tech challenged user from doing this himself, but those are a) a minority b) are mostly indistinguishable from normal users so theyy probably don't care.

Re:How stupid, and useless (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#40372391)

Yeah, I'm sure that is it. I mean, it must be, right? There is no way that this is connected to the fact that Google makes all of it's money selling ads, and some 'service' that offers their content without their ads deprives them of income. That can't be it, nope. Gotta be the RIAA.

Re:How stupid, and useless (1)

mrops (927562) | more than 2 years ago | (#40371791)

and what about the children... ohhh think of the children.

Re:How stupid, and useless (4, Insightful)

Instine (963303) | more than 2 years ago | (#40371107)

its an exercise in ass covering.

Re:How stupid, and useless (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#40371115)

Now it's harder to do with my smartphone though.... It was always kind of cool to hear a song, find it on youtube, pass the URL to youtube-mp3 and immediately have it in my phone - all while away from my computer.

Re:How stupid, and useless (5, Insightful)

fuzzyfuzzyfungus (1223518) | more than 2 years ago | (#40371127)

It is trivial to extract the audio from a youtube video and convert it to an mp3. There are tools on Windows, Linux, and OSX that can do that without a lot of effort. So, shutting down this site is, IMO, an exercise in futility.

I suspect that you are underestimating the degree of laziness, technical ignorance, and futzing-with-youtube-on-computers-they-can't-install-stuff-on-because-they-are-at-work/school, at play here.

Obviously, Google knows that you can do whatever you damn well want with the video once you've downloaded it(and, while they receive no further ad revenue, it also doesn't cost them anything further, and they have no way of going after you, so they aren't going to bother).

I suspect, though, that Google takes a dim view of tools, usable even by morons, that eat their bandwidth, throw away any ads they serve, and quite possibly upset the RIAA and friends without any benefit to Google.

Re:How stupid, and useless (1, Insightful)

bazorg (911295) | more than 2 years ago | (#40371631)

That last part of your comment might be the key. If Google were to neglect this kind of infringement, the music and film industries associations could find grounds to claim that Google is damaging their businesses.

Re:How stupid, and useless (3, Informative)

Razgorov Prikazka (1699498) | more than 2 years ago | (#40371141)

Linux:
$ cd /tmp
$ ffmpeg -i FlashFoO bar.mp3
Done...

Re:How stupid, and useless (1)

Arancaytar (966377) | more than 2 years ago | (#40371293)

If you're already on Linux and using ffmpeg, why not encode it as .ogg? Unless you have to accomodate a poor portable media player, but even most of those support it now.

Re:How stupid, and useless (2)

TeknoHog (164938) | more than 2 years ago | (#40371351)

If you're already on Linux and using ffmpeg, why not encode it as .ogg?

Because it is already an mp3 stream, and re-encoding into another lossy format would make the quality even worse.

Re:How stupid, and useless (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#40371919)

Because it is already an mp3 stream, and re-encoding into another lossy format would make the quality even worse.

It's not actually, half of the flv s and mp4s it's an AAC stream or something, and the webms seem to be mostly Ogg Vorbis, so you get white noise garbage if you try to extract and re-encode using a "one size fits all" solution. .
.. erhm .. or so I've heard from someone on the internets ...

Besides, everyone knows the audio quality is shite, it's more as a reminder to one day buy that song because it's a nice song.
I even suspect some bands upload their songs with deliberate scratches in it (e.g. Mechanic Manyeruke (Ndofara [youtube.com] ), Loituma (Ievan Polkka [youtube.com] )), so you'll be reminded to buy the hi-fi version from them, and shamed if your friends find out you were so cheap as to play them a song ripped from Youtube.
It's all good.

P.S. mr. Manyeruke, people from Loituma: I promise I'll buy your music one day.

AC because of slight feeling of guilt.

Re:How stupid, and useless (1)

Razgorov Prikazka (1699498) | more than 2 years ago | (#40371949)

<quote>

<quote><p>If you're already on Linux and using ffmpeg, why not encode it as .ogg?</p></quote>

<p>
Because it is already an mp3 stream, and re-encoding into another lossy format would make the quality even worse.
</p></quote>

Besides the technicalities (on which parent is right), I have an old MP3 player too. It can contain about 1 cd in mp3 format. nothing else. I am happy with it, because it is enough for me.

Re:How stupid, and useless (3, Informative)

cpu6502 (1960974) | more than 2 years ago | (#40371989)

>>>Because it is already an mp3 stream

Usually it's an MPEG4 codec, like AAC or AACplusSBR. Converting to mp3 is a downgrade.

Re:How stupid, and useless (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#40371515)

My iPod classic is pretty far from a "poor" portable media player, and it still doesn't do .ogg files

Re:How stupid, and useless (1)

lexman098 (1983842) | more than 2 years ago | (#40371807)

Maybe you just have low standards.

Re:How stupid, and useless (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#40372301)

Or, more likely, nobody cares about or uses .ogg

Re:How stupid, and useless (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#40372297)

My iPod classic is pretty far from a "poor" portable media player, and it still doesn't do .ogg files

Poor portable media player doesn't mean price, it refers to quality, therefore it is indeed a poor portable media player.

Re:How stupid, and useless (1)

JBMcB (73720) | more than 2 years ago | (#40371561)

Why even re-encode it? Usually it's straight MP4, or an MP4 wrapped in an FLV container. Suck out the aac, put it back in an audio-only MP4 - nearly anything can play it.

Re:How stupid, and useless (1)

TheRealMindChild (743925) | more than 2 years ago | (#40372101)

You must be young. Too many of us ripped our cd's to ogg, only to find that no sub-$100 mp3 player seems to play them. Then you have the fun of re-ripping your multitudes of cds, or transcoding them all to mp3, losing even more quality.

Buy a cheap Android phone with no minutes (1)

tepples (727027) | more than 2 years ago | (#40372433)

If you've already bought a smartphone and it isn't made by Apple or Nokia, then you have an Android-powered PMP supporting .ogg files. If you haven't already bought a smartphone, you can buy an $80 PCD Venture phone from Virgin Mobile and never buy minutes for it.

Re:How stupid, and useless (1)

VMaN (164134) | more than 2 years ago | (#40371181)

They are simply stopping a leecher, they don't care about people doing it for themselves.

Re:How stupid, and useless (1)

micheas (231635) | more than 2 years ago | (#40372065)

They have had a google chrome extension for a long time (a couple years?) that has been hosted by google, So, I think this is due to some recent event of some sort with regards to Google.

Re:How stupid, and useless (4, Insightful)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#40371183)

It is trivial to extract the audio from a youtube video and convert it to an mp3. There are tools on Windows, Linux, and OSX that can do that without a lot of effort. So, shutting down this site is, IMO, an exercise in futility.

True. It's also pretty damn easy to recover the .avi, .mp4, or .flv video and process it client-side. Whether it infringes copyright or not, what you do with ffmpeg on files that reside client-side, etc., is your problem, not Google's.

Where this website crossed the line is in trying to monetize it by being a wrapper around YouTube.

Full disclosure: My position on the issue can be summarized as "fuck streaming [slashdot.org] ." Streaming media is the memory hole [wikipedia.org] of 1984. For free/fan-based content that doesn't infringe (e.g. fair use), it's nice to know that you can keep your favorite content, even after your friends deactivate their accounts, or if a lawyer claiming ownership of a 2-second sample in a 3-minute video disagrees with you.

Re:How stupid, and useless (4, Insightful)

ZorinLynx (31751) | more than 2 years ago | (#40371917)

This is why I save EVERYTHING that I really like. You can't count on anything online still being there tomorrow, much less ten years down the road.

Especially if it's something not many people care about. This is why people like Jason Scott (from textfiles.org) are my heroes.

Re:How stupid, and useless (1, Interesting)

SydShamino (547793) | more than 2 years ago | (#40371227)

I've only ever bothered to do so with one song: a song that I like from my Pandora station that isn't available for sale anywhere physical or digital (a remix from an old import CD). I found it on a different, legal on-demand streaming music service and captured the audio.

For anything else, though, $1 is worth far less than the ten minutes it takes to do this process, so I just buy the song.

Re:How stupid, and useless (1)

hawguy (1600213) | more than 2 years ago | (#40371281)

It is trivial to extract the audio from a youtube video and convert it to an mp3. There are tools on Windows, Linux, and OSX that can do that without a lot of effort. So, shutting down this site is, IMO, an exercise in futility.

It's only futile if Google's goal is to prevent people from transcoding audio from a video into an MP3 (afterall, so far, there's no DRM that can keep someone from plugging the analog audio-out cable from their computer into their sound card though I'm sure some day RIAA and MPAA will make sure we have analog fingerprints on all of our outputs that would close this analog hole). However, if Google's goal is to appease the RIAA and make it appear as though they are helping to protected RIAA's rights, then perhaps it's not so futile afterall.

Re:How stupid, and useless (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#40372441)

How much ad revenue do you suppose Google gets from stuff that people have downloaded? Zero. See a problem?

I agree.... (1)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#40371033)

...people can do better than Mp3.

blocked? (1)

ruf10 (961050) | more than 2 years ago | (#40371037)

"YouTube apparently has blocked YouTube-MP3.org's servers from accessing the site."
Works for me ...and has very nice piece under the example link

Re:blocked? (1)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#40371097)

They're lucky Google didn't go for a trademark infringement suit.

Because there arent already (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#40371047)

Because there arent already hundreds of programs that can already do that.

What about the Garden of Your Mind? (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#40371049)

The Mister Rogers remix [youtube.com] is a catchy tune. If they put it in iTunes, I'd buy it. I like listening to it as audio only.

So what? (1)

Eightbitgnosis (1571875) | more than 2 years ago | (#40371065)

There are more than another dozen viable options to download Youtube videos

Browser Extensions (4, Informative)

SJHillman (1966756) | more than 2 years ago | (#40371067)

What about sites that host browser extensions/add-ons/plug-ins? Opera, Chrome and Firefox all have extensions that will do this right from the YouTube page with a single click.

Re:Browser Extensions (2, Interesting)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#40371185)

Most of those actually use an interim server like the one in the article to make the conversion, so could be blocked. Even those that don't frequently have problems. Youtube keeps adjusting the way it streams the media files to try and optimize overall bandwidth use and performance, and every time they make a change it breaks the plugins for a few days. That said, I don't think they can outright block them without blocking the media itself; a browser that allowed websites to query every plugin installed would be a serious security threat.

Re:Browser Extensions (5, Informative)

tlhIngan (30335) | more than 2 years ago | (#40371651)

Most of those actually use an interim server like the one in the article to make the conversion, so could be blocked. Even those that don't frequently have problems. Youtube keeps adjusting the way it streams the media files to try and optimize overall bandwidth use and performance, and every time they make a change it breaks the plugins for a few days. That said, I don't think they can outright block them without blocking the media itself; a browser that allowed websites to query every plugin installed would be a serious security threat.

Actually, it's really easy to do it yourself, and it works extremely well in Firefox. It'll work with most sites and is unblockable basically. The sites it won't work with are sites that do exclusive streaming (no caching and play/pause/rewind/etc requires are handled by the server which changes its bitstream) and sites that break the video into tiny segments and the player dynamically changes the quality.

What you need is a firefox extension called "Live HTTP Headers" that lets you see HTTP headers as they scroll by, and something like Flashblock or NoScript that prevents running of flash (HTML5 video isn't that prevalent yet and only big ones like YouTube, Vimeo and Dailymotion support it while everyone else still uses flash).

The method is to load the page up, then open the Live HTTP Header window. Click the flash player and let it load and start the video. One of the things Live HTTP Headers will have captured is... the URL for the media (look for MIME type video/flv or video/mp4). Copy that URL and paste it in a browser tab (which also gives you cookies). If you don't have a handler, it'll ask to download. If you do, block the site temporarily and use NoScript to right-click and download it.

This method works because it relies on the fact that most video sites retrieve video via HTTP or HTTPS (could be a Flash limitation) rather than streaming the video (which requires server work) and using HTTP/HTTPS makes it more CDN-friendly since it's a static file.

Re:Browser Extensions (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#40372247)

For most users, that's not something that would be called 'easy'. There's still the extraction of the audio file (and possibly conversion) so that it can be used in other software or on you DAP of choice as well.

You have to remember that Slashdotters tend to be more technically literate than the average user. Sure, *We* can do something, that doesn't mean everyone else can.

Re:Browser Extensions (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#40372329)

Actually, the valid url changes every few seconds, so much beyond right there, that exact url is useless.

Re:Browser Extensions (1)

makomk (752139) | more than 2 years ago | (#40372335)

I'm pretty sure that some of the video downloader plugins for Firefox already work this way.

Re:Browser Extensions (1)

The MAZZTer (911996) | more than 2 years ago | (#40371283)

Chrome Web Store forbids extensions that download YouTube videos. The one I use [spoi.com] has a special Web Store version that cuts out that feature but the site where you can get the "Full" edition of the extension is listed IIRC.

That tool just figures out the url of the media files backing the YouTube video though, you still have to do all the conversion work yourself if you want it in a different format or just want the audio from it.

Of course I only use it to save perfectly legal bits of sound bites and so forth. Yup.

Re:Browser Extensions (1)

Formorian (1111751) | more than 2 years ago | (#40371297)

To be fair, AFAIK the extension for MP3's sends you to a website (or 2) that auto puts in the URL for you. At least the chrome one. Now it will still let you DL the direct mp4/flv in various formats.

TBH I've written a playon script that will pull the direct file, which creates a better viewing experience in playon from youtube. So maybe this keeps my wife from easily converting video's to MP3's, but all I have to do is create another script that will pull it and convert it. Granted my linux servers are in the basement, and I know it's very easy on linux, but can't be that difficult on windows either once you get the physical mp4/flv file.

It's Only Censorship When the *IAA Does It. (-1, Troll)

l0ungeb0y (442022) | more than 2 years ago | (#40371101)

Remember kids -- Google took the solemn pinky oath to Not Be Evil, so the removal of YouTube-MP3.com from their search results is for your own good. And remember, Youtube is staunchly against copyright violation and has never violated any copyright or made copyrighted media available to unauthorized parties -- ever.

Re:It's Only Censorship When the *IAA Does It. (1)

houstonbofh (602064) | more than 2 years ago | (#40371195)

It is not removed from the search results. It is also not a .com... Really, at least fully read the summery.

Re:It's Only Censorship When the *IAA Does It. (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#40371203)

I just searched for it and it still shows up in search results. From the summary, looks more like they denied the site access to youtube which may still be censorship, but not at all the same thing as you erroneously claim.

Re:It's Only Censorship When the *IAA Does It. (1)

Johann Lau (1040920) | more than 2 years ago | (#40371513)

Uhm what? If they didn't block the site, but removed it from search results, people could still find it via other links and use it. Blocking it from youtube just leaves a useless husk in the search results, so I don't quite get your point.

Re:It's Only Censorship When the *IAA Does It. (1)

SydShamino (547793) | more than 2 years ago | (#40371273)

Not that Google isn't evil when it suits them, but I'm relatively certain that this is a CYA move to keep YouTube from being sued by the **AA using whatever made-up laws their lawyers have pushed through to make this illegal.

Re:It's Only Censorship When the *IAA Does It. (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#40371303)

They haven;t removed it from their search results; they've removed the sites ability to access the youtube servers. It's the opposite to censorship.

Censorship is saying 'I won't let you say that'.
Google is saying 'We're not going to answer you'.

The direction of information transfer is the critical difference; we have no right to shut someone else up, but they have no right to force us to speak.

Re:It's Only Censorship When the *IAA Does It. (1)

OvERKiLLsFFT (986079) | more than 2 years ago | (#40371361)

Remember kids -- Google took the solemn pinky oath to Not Be Evil, so the removal of YouTube-MP3.com from their search results is for your own good. And remember, Youtube is staunchly against copyright violation and has never violated any copyright or made copyrighted media available to unauthorized parties -- ever.

RTFA, Google did not censor anyone here.

Re:It's Only Censorship When the *IAA Does It. (1)

hawguy (1600213) | more than 2 years ago | (#40371399)

Remember kids -- Google took the solemn pinky oath to Not Be Evil, so the removal of YouTube-MP3.com from their search results is for your own good. And remember, Youtube is staunchly against copyright violation and has never violated any copyright or made copyrighted media available to unauthorized parties -- ever.

Evil is not always black and white. If the choice is between allowing videos to be transcoded to MP3's or having RIAA pull down every song on Youtube because they feel they are going to eat into MP3 sales, which choice would the average user consider to be more evil?

Sucks for youtube-mp3.org, but... (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#40371145)

Come on, what was youtube-mp3.org really expecting? This is one of the only routes for Google where they don't get sued for complicity in copyright infringement (note that the right-or-wrong-ness of them getting sued is not what I am saying, it is the likelihood of it). Also, Google probably needs to keep youtube content on youtube, or else they will get no ad revenue (thus, the ToS clause, which I haven't read, and don't know if it exists).

It doesn't matter ... (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#40371231)

that they've been blocked by Google. Nobody will need to look them up any more.
They're about to be Slashdotted :-)

Boy that sucks. (1)

halcyon1234 (834388) | more than 2 years ago | (#40371257)

Boy, that sucks. If only there were developers working on cure this ill. Perhaps users of this very site [slashdot.org] . Maybe they could solve the problem with a firefox extension [mozilla.org] ?

Too bad. Because I would have totally loved that to be a real thing.

Protip: It is, and I'm being cagey.

And not a single f**k was given... (5, Informative)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#40371261)

Cloud:
- Keepvid: http://keepvid.com/
- Vixy: http://vixy.net/
- Saveyoutube: http://saveyoutube.com/
- Savevid: http://www.savevid.com/
- More: www.google.com/search?hl=en&q=youtube+video+download

Firefox addons:
- Download Flash and Video: https://addons.mozilla.org/en-US/firefox/addon/download-flash-and-video/?src=search
- YouTube Download: https://addons.mozilla.org/en-US/firefox/addon/youtube-download/?src=search
- 1-Click YouTube Video Download: https://addons.mozilla.org/en-US/firefox/addon/1-click-youtube-video-download/?src=search
- Download YouTube Videos as MP4 and FLV: https://addons.mozilla.org/en-US/firefox/addon/download-youtube/?src=search
- More: https://addons.mozilla.org/en-US/firefox/search/?q=firefox+download&appver=&platform=

Chrome extentions:
- YouTube Downloader: MP3 / HD Video: https://chrome.google.com/webstore/detail/hokfcbmfpgeajcgkaeigohghnkhjmcbj
- FVD Video Downloader: https://chrome.google.com/webstore/detail/lfmhcpmkbdkbgbmkjoiopeeegenkdikp

Manually:
- HOWTO: Download FLV videos from YouTube manually: http://inspirated.com/2007/08/24/howto-download-flv-videos-from-youtube-manually

Dear Google,

give up. LOL, noobs...

Regards,
NotASingleF**k.

Re:And not a single f**k was given... (1)

avandesande (143899) | more than 2 years ago | (#40371763)

You really think that is what this is about? It's about getting them of the hook from a legal liability standpoint. Obviously they cannot control the client but they can control requests made through another web site....

Re:And not a single f**k was given... (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#40372161)

And how many of 'em are inside U$A jurisdiction?

Just a reminder, the World just don't give a single f**k for U$A corporate-lobby-broke-legal-system...

Regards,
NotASingleF**k.

I Thought Google Was A Search Engine..... (0)

zenlessyank (748553) | more than 2 years ago | (#40371285)

Not a Judgement Engine!!

Sensationalist Title (4, Insightful)

Haedrian (1676506) | more than 2 years ago | (#40371307)

I don't see why this article is of interest.

A site does something which goes against youtube's TOS - Google changes something in Youtube to block it - and sends a letter to the owner of the website. So?

If you Google it - you still get search results, and Google didn't do any tricks which we find immoral.

Why is this an article? What were we expecting? How could Google have dealth with it better?

Re:Sensationalist Title (1)

saveferrousoxide (2566033) | more than 2 years ago | (#40371819)

It's like a news story about the cool kid ratting out someone for smoking behind the gym at lunch. It's playing on the supposition that Google is somehow a benevolent lover of all that is free, rather than a business being run by people trying to make a profit in all ways that are not deemed "evil" by the powers that be.

Re:Sensationalist Title (1)

rgbrenner (317308) | more than 2 years ago | (#40372415)

^ I agree with this

It was nice of Google to send them a letter though..

Audacity (2)

dubbayu_d_40 (622643) | more than 2 years ago | (#40371313)

I used to use Audacity for this, and it worked well. However, the audio quality on YouTube is noticeably awful.

I don't think they need to block these sites. The poor quality is what finally pushed me to start purchasing songs.

Re:Audacity (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#40372139)

I've heard that it's better quality on HD videos, but I've never tried to make the comparison.

I can't remember why I stopped using Audacity, but my work computer has RealPlayer which adds a handle to every video that lets you download/convert it.

There is a fix for that... (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#40371329)

DownloadHelper [downloadhelper.net]

No big problem. (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#40371331)

Simple solution. Just use the software Replay Music to record whatever you are playing on Youtube or any other website.

Will they block real.com next? (0)

michaelmalak (91262) | more than 2 years ago | (#40371403)

Will youtube.com sue real.com next?

BTW IANAL but I think it's legal to download YouTube video because of the Betamax case. I suspect YouTube-MP3.org may have been targeted because a) they purloined their trademark and b) YouTube-MP3.org acts as a third party "distributing" copyrighted works (not merely Betamaxing it for time-shifting) because they act as an intermediary between YouTube and the end user. It's the low-hanging fruit for YouTube -- if they can succeed against YouTube-MP3.org then probably the next target will be a similar site that doesn't mimic their trademark. Then if they succeed with that maybe they'll even try their luck with going after tool vendors (though probably at first one smaller than real.com), thereby overturning Betamax.

Re:Will they block real.com next? (1)

zoward (188110) | more than 2 years ago | (#40372081)

Will youtube.com sue real.com next?

BTW IANAL but I think it's legal to download YouTube video because of the Betamax case. I suspect YouTube-MP3.org may have been targeted because a) they purloined their trademark and b) YouTube-MP3.org acts as a third party "distributing" copyrighted works (not merely Betamaxing it for time-shifting) because they act as an intermediary between YouTube and the end user. It's the low-hanging fruit for YouTube -- if they can succeed against YouTube-MP3.org then probably the next target will be a similar site that doesn't mimic their trademark. Then if they succeed with that maybe they'll even try their luck with going after tool vendors (though probably at first one smaller than real.com), thereby overturning Betamax.

Why bother going after anyone else? It costs money to litigate. Google went after these guys for three reasons:

1) They infringed on Youtube's trademark.

2) They're wasting Youtube's bandwidth.

3) Shutting them down gives Google proof they're protecting IP when the **AA's come knocking on the door.

Anyone with half a brain can find an alternate way to scrape the audio substate from a Youtube video.

Easy on Linux (1)

jampola (1994582) | more than 2 years ago | (#40371517)

apt-get install youtube-dl (deb, ubuntu) pacman -S youtube-dl (arch)

How I interpreted the headline. (3, Insightful)

Ukab the Great (87152) | more than 2 years ago | (#40371625)

A Google service for bars called "Google Bars" that converts youtube songs into MP3.

Why not use Chrome (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#40371667)

Even if Chrome developers thought a javascript API to read from or tap the sound output was useful they would not add it because that would enable ripping youtube songs entirely client-side and it couldn't be blocked... the best you might get is a patch included in a poorly maintained fork of Chromium.

By using Chrome, you are promoting a web designed to work the way an advertising company wants it to work.

It's not blocked (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#40371873)

The site is still the first result on Google when you search "YouTube mp3". I clicked through that link, found a youtube video URL in another tab, converted and downloaded the mp3, which worked perfectly.

Maybe this is a publicity stunt to appease the RIAA, because nothing has really changed.

So? (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#40371909)

This kind of shit happens all day, every day. Some website/program does something that violates another site/programs EULA. We dont need to know about every god damn one of them.

And site is back to working again (1)

Cito (1725214) | more than 2 years ago | (#40372019)

The mods over at youtube-mp3.org have already fixed the problem, probably swapped ip's or something.

the site is back up working 100%...

youtube/google has failed and original post is no longer relevant.

Browser plugin (1)

Hatta (162192) | more than 2 years ago | (#40372113)

This could easily be replaced with a browser plugin. Then there's no one to C&D because the author of such a plugin need never agree to Googles TOS. Google would have to C&D their users directly.

should have rickrolled them (2)

dlmarti (7677) | more than 2 years ago | (#40372215)

Redirecting YouTube-MP3.org to the song "Never Gonna Give You Up" would have been more appropriate.

As if this stops anything (1)

kilodelta (843627) | more than 2 years ago | (#40372273)

There are still a number of sites out there that don't make mention of YouTube in their domain name that allow you to keep YouTube vids as MP4, MP3, etc. . So I doubt they'll catch them anytime soon.

Useless site (1)

Meneth (872868) | more than 2 years ago | (#40372409)

Not only did it recode the audio data, losing some quality, but it was also closed-source software-as-a-service. Good riddance.
Load More Comments
Slashdot Login

Need an Account?

Forgot your password?