Thread: YouTube

i ubuntu 'newbie' , have posted on absolute beginner section, regard various questions have had posting. few days ago, posted regarding difficulty youtube download, not .asf file load in computer. administrator came on thread, closed it, , issued 'infraction' me. inquired infraction, asking whether meant protect copyrighted material on youtube (of stated not doing) , advised of forum's policy regarding downloads youtube, against youtube's current eula download videos anymore. link main section of forum sent me, indicating youtube sticky. after number of emails , forth, suggested post queries in resolution portion of forum. last query follows: basic position follows: a. absolute beginners section (where beginners directly go), not indicate 'sticky' nor indicate mention of youtube download policy. therefore discreditable enforce such policies on forum areas have not been publicised, particularly in areas such 'absolute beginners', which, definition, presume lack of ubuntu/forum experience. b. citing 1 paragraph, out of context, youtube policy discrepant , inaccurate. youtube allows downloads of videos wherein permission licensors (other youtube) have been given, evidenced 1 paragraph eula quote. such permission evident in myriad of youtube entries wherein download link has been supplied, , apparently, approved youtube. c. necessary understand premise behind youtube's policy, wherein attempting enforce copyright protection commercial purposes. frankly, questionable whether majority of uploaders (licensors) 'own' or have rights videos have uploaded. presumed music mixes, videos taken tv broadcasts, etc., not have right. yet, youtube allows these uploads. additionally interesting that, under section 5.l of tos, specify videos not downloaded 'permanently or temporarily', yet, in fact, youtube videos 'temporarily' downloaded computer accesses them. d. ubuntu provides program downloading content youtube. safe assume such program presupposes 'honesty' , compliance of regulations, of downloader. not believe within perimeters of forum 'judge' ho nesty, compliance and/or intent. link have provided not allow me forward response whatever administrators handle such matters, may ask enough forward same proper recipient. while 'infraction' not impede further use of ubuntu and/or forum, wish objection voiced. thank you.

i have no favours presenting number of detailed points in unbroken wall of text no paragraph breaks, making them difficult read , assimilate. if wish heard, need think of audience. nevertheless, shall try address concerns.

seems me there 2 main issues, namely: forum policy on downloading youtube videos, , whether or not appropriate receive infraction point.

forum policy on downloading youtube

remind of forum code of conduct agreed when created forum account. in particular:

we not support circumventing tos, eula, etc here. such threads closed , offending users penalised infractions , warnings.

the youtube sticky refer merely clarification , amplification of main code of conduct applies youtube. remind of part of last paragraph of sticky:

we not court of law. if wish challenge terms hire lawyer , take argument youtube. arguments inappropriate here not administer website.

to pick of points:

it additionally interesting that, under section 5.l of tos, specify videos not downloaded 'permanently or temporarily', yet, in fact, youtube videos 'temporarily' downloaded computer accesses them.

frankly, find specious argument, if worries you, above, take youtube. terms of youtube's tos clear, , have respect that.

ubuntu provides program downloading content youtube.

it not. guess referring command-line app in universe repository. universe repository not officially supported ubuntu, , should not assume in universe (or multiverse) approved ubuntu.

frankly, questionable whether majority of uploaders (licensors) 'own' or have rights videos have uploaded. presumed music mixes, videos taken tv broadcasts, etc., not have right. yet, youtube allows these uploads.

are implying 2 wrongs make right, because uploaded material might infringe copyright, therefore acceptable others download it? if mean, find extraordinary suggestion. , second sentence incorrect. youtube have clear copyright policy , mechanism whereby copyright holders can request removal of uploaded material infringes copyright.

whether or not appropriate receive infraction point.

first pick couple of points:

an administrator came on thread, closed it, , issued 'infraction' me.

a forum moderator dealt thread, not administrator.

as link have provided not allow me forward response whatever administrators handle such matters, may ask enough forward same proper recipient.

you have posted in correct place, 1 or more of 7 forum administrators (who make forum council) can respond concerns.

had focused on appropriateness of infraction, have been prepared consider that, , sympathetically. instead, tried justify number of unconvincing (to me) arguments youtube's tos , forum code of conduct. before go further, have ask you: prepared follow forum code of conduct?

Forum The Ubuntu Forum Community Ubuntu Community Discussions Resolution Centre YouTube

Ubuntu