There are few legal differences.

1. in cache its harder for the average nontech person to access a cached video outside the website. Additionay in cache it’s considered a temporary store to help aid the service than a permament one.

2. When you download a video on Youtube it is probally against their terms of use while doing the same on Peertube seem widely permited by the playform based on the license the user uses. There are fewer Peertube videos that dont allow downloads then do.

With that said, a concerning amount of them have unknown selected as their license. So its hard to tell most of the time when its ok with the creator to download and if their ok/cool with it.

YouTube or Peertube? Now on Youtube, things are meant to be more corporate, while on Peertube, it is its own platform, and it is open source.

Makes sense. But when you add in the license that Peertube has available for creators to use for their videos, then the rules become more global I would assume. Might be wrong there.

The original uploader in particular would be the person sueing, i’m not really worried about the instance itself, since Peertube over all is opensource. They would probably sue the person downloading the work, although unlikely it could happen atleast legally.

One thing to add that I just found and looked into is that Peertube does seem to have a way to sort by license, atleast on sepia search, which is like a global search for most Peertube instance, though probally not every video gets featured on all instances ever made. So that seems to suggest even more that is is case by case basis whether it is legal to just go and download the videos freely.

My other concern is that not every video upload has a license submitted, those videos uploaded to a Peertube instance, that say that the license is ‘unknown’ it’s due to the uploader not deciding and that just complicates things further for whether it’s okay or not okay to download the video.

If we are going for this fediverse and opensource thing especially with video, legal use like this need to be looked into, simplified and more talked about so people can rest assured they are in the right legally. Even if the uploader might not be as likely do anything, it’s still an unknown license and that could leave people vulnerable especally in more creative cases especially when they reupload with little fair use to there aid.

That would apply if its scheduled like on tv but that wouldnt work if for standard video uploads would it?

I was thinking since most on peertube don’t tend to seek revenue from ads, so should it be acceptable? Peertube itself is opensource.

In summary i’m really asking for whether if it should be acceptable or not. Maybe it varies from uploader to uploader, but even then channels dont tend to state their own stance on this.

Even the scrapping in theory could be restricted. I might be wrong there.

Dolar tree, they will always have my back in this economy. 100 tea bags of green tea for 1.25 i’m set for a few months atleast on tea without paying anything. the upfront price for that item alone was $1.25

I don’t think it would be illegal unless it’s a Chromebook they lended to you directly to work at the company. If you went to a store and bought it your self it’s perfectly legal to throw ubuntu on that Chromebook.

Here’s where things start to get harder though…

Whether they will fire you… eh idk if I would take that risk. But if anything just ask the people working there for their opinion on it.

I don’t think it’s really changed, maybe it’s just your perception of it. It’s just as addictiv today as it was last year as I see it.

It’s optimal to them. You just don’t understand Youtube’s perspective of it yet. And then it’s unoptimal for them when you watch with the adblocker.

That’s a way to look at, but i’l personally still be using Peertube. instead of 3rd party YouTube apps.

in the short term they work, but YouTube can cut those 3rd party apps access at any time for any reason. Use Peertube for the better long term.

Yeah be like me and just use Peertube, I don’t even notice this stuff untill people complain about it haha.

deleted by creator

deleted by creator

I think what it is is, they were probably hoping the web integrity would work originally that Google was proposing, and were probably planning to take advantage of that. However, I guess since it has not went through yet at Google that they are still using their version of it but just limiting it to empty user agents in the browser?

Other than for that reason that I wouldn’t worry about someone user agent as an owner for reddit. If bots were an issue, wouldn’t I issue a warning for the user to slow down and maybe temporarily block the IP or something like that?

I don’t use AdBlock, I use Peertube. no ads by defualt. Never had any problems with YouTube knocking at my door.

Peertube, while empty at the content level, there are some known YouTubers who have a presence there. Especially Linux and open source YouTubers. But you will always find new people who only post on Peertube.

I would say that, for people that might be struggling with being attracted to kids, and are trying to stop or change that habbit this type of community would be a good start for them because atleast they are trying to an extent to be legal. As long that the people involved are of legal age, then it shouldn’t be problematic. That’s like if I were to ask this question;

There are some kids at highschool at age 15 that look older, is that problematic? If there were actual minors on the communitiy however, that would actually be a legal concern. But it would have to be knowingly if i’m not mistaken that they are actually underage. If whether you know or not their a minor, even if they lie about their age is a legal concern correct in replies. But then in that case any relationship could be at legal risk if the other person lies to you and is under age.