YouTube-MP3 Fights Google With Lawyers and 220K+ Signature Petition

enigmax
July 3, 2012
90
google,
youtube
Print

Last month YouTube-MP3, one of the web’s largest YouTube conversion sites, was hit with legal threats from Google. Shut down in seven days, its lawyers ordered, or face legal repercussions. Now, after commissioning the legal opinions of two prominent German lawyers, the site’s owner is fighting back, and not without support. A Change.org petition which asks Google to allow conversion tools has already accumulated more than 220,000 signatures.

Mid-June, one of the web’s largest YouTube conversion sites was hit with threats from Google. YouTube-MP3, a site with more than 1.3 million daily visitors, was threatened with legal action over its service that converts YouTube videos into audio downloads.

Google’s lawyers gave YouTube-MP3 seven days to comply, but in the meantime the search giant took technical measures to severely restrict its ability to operate. But weeks on it’s clear that YouTube-MP3 owner Philip Matesanz believes he has a cause worth fighting for.

Philip, a 21-year-old applied computer science student, today gave TorrentFreak details of his structured fightback against the US search giant in the hope that Google will give him the fair hearing that up until now he says he has been denied.

“I have to admit that have previously never sought case studies on Google’s legal position. Until now I thought they would understand that they cannot stop their users from creating recordings of a public video and would simply tolerate it,” Philip told TorrentFreak.

In order to precisely understand the situation, Philip recently sought the opinion of lawyers on the legality of YouTube-MP3 in Germany and its functionality in respect of the YouTube Terms of Service, an agreement Google says YouTube-MP3 breached. Philip spoke with two lawyers – Philipp C. Redlich of HÄRTING Rechtsanwälte and well-known IT lawyer Christian Solmecke from the Wilde Beuger Solmecke law firm.

Solmecke sent TorrentFreak a copy of his report this morning. He is absolutely clear on one of the main points, that YouTube-MP3 does not use the YouTube API. As a result “..YouTube’s API Terms of Service do not apply here, as no contract has been created which would allow for the Terms of Service to come into effect.”

So ToS argument aside, what about the inevitable copyright-related questions?

“The infringement of YouTube’s Terms of Service brings with it no legal consequences for YouTube-MP3.org. YouTube-MP3.org is also not at fault so far as Copyright Law is concerned YouTube-MP3.org undertakes no copyright-relevant action.

“Also, liability of the user’s for copyright infringement is not incurred because their actions are covered by the right to make private copies under paragraph 53 sub-paragraph 1 sentence 1 Copyright Law. The demand for YouTube-MP3.org to bring about a cessation of its service is therefore unfounded,” Solmecke writes.

Credit: Ioannis Milionis (mycartoons.de)

The report from Redlich’s is also detailed, noting that there are “..strong arguments in favor of YouTube not being able [to successfully] object to either the user or the provision of the MP3 conversion service, YouTube-MP3.org, on the grounds of an infringement of its copyright or of unfair competition.”

As long as YouTube doesn’t implement encryption to prevent storage of streamed content, doing so would be legal, Redlich adds, noting that the downloading of streamed content from YouTube for private use does not require the permission of copyright holders.

In addition to trying to bring down his service this year, Philip says that Google has also undermined his ability to generate revenue in the past. In 2010, Philip says that Google closed down his Adsense account, kept several months of earnings, and then ignored letters sent to the company by his lawyer.

Then last year Philip said he signed an advertising deal with another company that Google was in the process of buying. The acquisition didn’t go ahead but Philip feels that Google had a hand in influencing the other company not to do business with him. The signed advertising deal was left unfulfilled.

Whether or not Google will be prepared to change their position considering the developments above remains to be seen – thus far they haven’t been responsive to Philip’s lone voice. But would a few hundred thousand more make a difference perhaps?

Philip recently started a petition on Change.org asking Google to allow third-party recording tools for YouTube. The response from his userbase has been huge.

“I have started a public petition that already has more than 220,000 signatures even through it hasn’t been mentioned by any news site,” Philip explained.

“I didn’t expect such a great feedback. It is not based on any news coverage but on the strong will of my users who are spreading the word about it. I’ve already surpassed other petitions that received worldwide press coverage.”

So for now it’s over to Google to consider whether YouTube-MP3 is a potentially useful partner or one to be threatened and put out of business.

Interestingly, perhaps all is not lost.

Google already appears to have softened its stance on allowing users to download YouTube content for later viewing…..

An update from Philip is posted here.

Previous Post | Next Post

Follow @torrentfreak

Gf

derp
- thedude321
  
  I am adding my signature to the lot. Its about time people fight back and stop being p*ssies.
  - Violated0
    
    I have signed as well but I believe 15 million US voters and over 200,000 people in Europe have already highlighted that they a’int pussies! You are right though that there is no CHANGE unless you are ACTIVE.
    - Fake Name
      
      You are morons. These leeches are profiting off of other people’s work that they have no rights to, and are now claiming that it is their legal right to do so. They’re no better than the MAFIA.
    - Guest
      
      @Fake Name They provide a service that extracts audio from a publicly available video. What the user does with that tool is up to them. Don’t share it if you don’t want it shared. If they’re worried about the money though, they should do the same fucking thing. It would put the site right out of business.
    - IDIOCRACY
      
      And being active might have helped in another case, ACTA is off….
    - Bobbi O. Mayweather
      
      Now with SOPA and PIPA dead and ACTA on the way out all signs currently say that Google is back to piracy bashing. http://BusinessJob7.blogspot.com
    - Guest
      
      @Real Moron
      
      1. They provide a voluntary service. They are not selling other people’s work for a 90%+ cut of the profits, they are not trying to force you to use them through litigation, they have not erected a copyright monopoly. They’re much better than the MAFIAA in every conceivable way.
      
      2. You have no idea if Youtube-MP3 is profiting or just able to cover costs, or even able to cover costs.
    - http://twitter.com/PaulaRRobinson1 Paula R. Robinson
      
      I can tell you that profiting from that is very easy. http://FoxGetPositionWork.blogspot.com
    - Real Name
      
      When one is out in public, one cannot have a reasonable expectation of privacy. For example if you’re walking around the local shopping mall and someone takes a photo in which you happen to be visible, there is nothing you can legally do. Why should content found online in a space designated as public be any different? If you don’t want something shared amongst the public, don’t share it publicly! Why is such simple reasoning so hard to grasp?
  - Jefi
    
    I’ve also signed it. F*ck Google!
- E1401505
  
  I’ve the impression that Youtube is paying for music companies (http://www.telegraph.co.uk/technology/google/6128362/YouTube-music-industry-video-deal-is-a-landmark-deal.html). If so, why would they allow other companies to make money with their services without getting paid (ad revenue)?
small-brain

leave google alone guys last thing we want is for them to also join the ‘anti-piracy’ mindset
- Guest
  
  Too late, For Google to bring this action shows that are doing “anti-piracy”.
  - john doe
    
    I think it’s not that Google really care about this conversion tool. I trully think they wouldn’t bother.
    
    The problem is the pressure from outside that will be put upon them, with RIAA complaining “Hey, you can’t let them rip the audio! If you let it, then we sue YOU.”
    
    So I think Google is just trying to cover their ass in the very first place, because in the insanity of the last few years, we know that it was difficult to establish YouTube legality in itself.
- Violated0
  
  Google has always been anti-piracy but they don’t hate piracy as much as they hate censorship. Now with SOPA and PIPA dead and ACTA on the way out all signs currently say that Google is back to piracy bashing.
  
  You can see another example here…
  http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/technology-18670734
GettiYetti

lol, in come the bottom feeding, blood sucking attorneys lol.
Planet-Privacy.tk
- GettiYetti
  
  lol, me got too carried away, there you go. lol as always
  http://i46.tinypic.com/n76sl.gif
AnotherShaft

tools that people enjoy and actually use should be banned at all costs and their inventors hauled through the courts or killed.
- Fake Name
  
  These leeches (the youtube ripping sites) are profiting off of other people’s work
  that they have no rights to, and are now claiming that it is their legal
  right to do so. They’re no better than the MAFIA.
  - Anon1
    
    Welcome MAFIAA troll, we’ve been expecting you.
    - Guest
      
      He isn’t a MAFIAA troll. He is sharing his opinion.
      
      As someone who has previously owned a leeching website for Youtube to MP3s and another website that generated premium links from sites like Megaupload, Rapidshare etc… I can tell you that profiting from that is very easy. Blackhat money is a shit load easier to make than whitehat methods.
    - Guest
      
      He isn’t sharing his opinion, he’s spamming troll shit.
      
      Take a look at the replies to the first comment on this article. See anything familiar? Now look back here. See anything copy & pasted?
      
      As for your claims, you have no proof for them. So I’m gonna go with: you’re making your story up.
  - Guest
    
    Then you better send the Feds to everyone who has a video recorder or dvd recorder or blu-ray recorder because they too can be used to rip of the tv etc. lol
- Nick
  
  just like witch back in old times^^
http://profiles.google.com/pianogamer Knut Harald

Looks like the “Do no evil” days are over for this company
Anonymous

if Google continues down this path and shuts down YouTube-MP3, it had better make damn sure that it treats all sites the same or be prepared to take the consequences. as it is, i hope Google suffers badly for this attitude. it needs to remember that as big and as powerful as it is, it is not so big and powerful that it cant be brought down. if people think what they are doing is wrong or at the behest of the despised entertainment industries, they will regret their action. the proponents of SOPA/PIPA had that opinion. they were taught a lesson that they wont forget in a hurry. nothing stopping the same thing happening again. there are other browsers and search engines out there that work just as well!
- Fake Name
  
  These leeches (the youtube ripping sites) are profiting off of other people’s work
  that they have no rights to, and are now claiming that it is their legal
  right to do so. They’re no better than the MAFIA.
  - Anonymous
    
    dont talk like a twat!
  - Real name
    
    @82f1d60ca9bcab0e8499e0f36f04a9f8:disqus Do you even have a clue what you’re talking about? Youtube isn’t owned by Warner or Sony and everyone else. Youtube is FULL of available, non copyright content. All my subscriptions are youtube partners that refuse to “sign” with the big idiots.
    Before calling people for listening leeches maybe look in the mirror and see who is really leeching off who. Music industry has been leeching off the consumers for decades.
    - Guest
      
      YouTube is non-profit…
      
      Fake Name was saying the leecher websites WERE profitable.
      
      That’s the difference.
  - Guest
    
    Then you better send the Feds to everyone who has a video recorder or
    dvd recorder or blu-ray recorder because they too can be used to rip of
    the tv etc. to record music videos from lol
JamesD

Seriously you guys? This is like reading Fox News…..which is not a good thing. Google’s terms of services explicitly prohibit this kind of thing. There has to be SOME kind of protection with Terms of services. Let’s move off of google and use ANY site that provides media or data………if the site prohibits someone from stealing their data, then that’s stealing.

I cannot believe that they even fighting google. Has nothing to do with piracy. Has to do with the simple fact they are breaking their stated rules.
- http://twitter.com/Zirkonia V.-P. M.
  
  Enjoy the flamewar.
  - JamesD
    
    ….Waiting.
    - Dave
      
      @cd934ad54eaf7f31aab40c842cd67f51:disqus You do realize google themselves offer apps to download the content directly to your android devices in which you can copy to your computer off the android device?
      
      TOS or not, google allows several software vendors to do it. Nothing illegal about what youtube-mp3 does. Google is also fighting a war that isn’t theirs
- Colin Carr
  
  Did you read the article? Perhaps you just missed the bit where two lots of lawyers say the service does NOT infringe on Google’s terms of service.
  - Guest
    
    Guess he needs to wear a pair of Googles oops i mean Goggles lol
- Eddy
  
  “.if the site prohibits someone from STEALING THEIR data, then that’s stealing. ”
  
  Maybe you will correct me for not being as knowledgeable as you believe you are, but does google OWN the rights for this data.?
  And as has been said many times before on here…stealing is to deprive someone of their property, copying is NOT stealing.
  
  Its better to let people believe your an idiot, than open your moth and prove it. ;)
- Ishigidydigidy
  
  He had two lawyers, at least one of which is well known, have said that it does NOT use the YouTube API(learn what this is, kid), and thus does not violate ToS. Read the article top to bottom before you make a comment like this.
Pingback: YouTube-MP3 Fights Google With Lawyers and 220K+ Signature Petition
Dupe

seems to me that either Google just doesn’t like this guy, for some reason (giving a service better than them?) or they have been put up/encouraged to do this by an equally jealous entertainment industry. whichever, it is a very poor show from Google. they should know better. it smacks of the very things i hate. BEING A BULLY!!! for no other reason other than because they can!
- Max
  
  YouTube earns money from ad revenues. Sites like that use YouTube API for free and therefore YouTube gets less money when people get the ripped files from those sites instead of when people have to actually be on the YouTube page to rip the files.
  
  Why can’t you just get some easy plug-in that rips the files from YouTube directly in your browser? That way Google is happy and you don’t really have to do any extra work. How hard is that? Jeez.
  - Tzar
    
    It seems u don’t know how to read. From blog:
    ” He is absolutely clear on one of the main points, that YouTube-MP3 does
    not use the YouTube API. As a result “..YouTube’s API Terms of Service
    do not apply here, as no contract has been created which would allow for
    the Terms of Service to come into effect.” ”
    So he isnt using YT API, in fact he didnt agree to anything. And as far as I understand what he is doing is fully legal. So yea, google is bully in this case.
  - Guest
    
    Guess Google is going down the same slippery path of the Hollywood Industries in suing people etc. as an (extortion) attempt to get money that they claim are loosing. This conversion site is not breeching the TOS of Google and neither does it breech copyright laws in the fact that is for personal use only as stated by the 2 lawyers in defence of the MP3 conversion site. Google is just bullying and throwing its weight around in forcing this MP3 conversion to get the hell out because they don’t like the fact in what it is doing even though they are not breaking any TOS or breeching copyright.
    - PasserBy
      
      I saw this coming back when they changed there TOS and Privacy Policy. they arnt gonna side with the people forever.
      this is why i switched to using a metasearch engine, like duckduckgo.
Pingback: YouTube-MP3 Fights Google With Lawyers and 220K+ Signature Petition
Gyestt

flvto.com is easier and has a chrome ext. and rips hd music
Spice

big lol. and what about the millions unauthorized music promotion channels on youtube? a giant with a glass rooftop.
- Jefi
  
  Don’t throw a stone ;-)
Wormlore

As I see things here, Google/YouTube is not completely wrong here.
Most of YouTube’s business model is based on two points:
- either a private party connects to a video’s page, displaying ads and providing some personnal data, “paying” for it with more or less privacy loss.
- or a third-party software connects to the webservice, using a specific partner key, paying for it as far as I know.
In this case, completely bypassing both is not a position I’d defend. They use YT content, so they have to agree to YT ToS. Not using the intended “entrances” to the site (either webpage or webservice) doesn’t prevent this.

I don’t mean I defend a strict stance on copyright, but forcefully using your own terms won’t help defending a better, more balanced copyright.
- Guest
  
  Ahh, an open minded response. Thank you for sharing your opinion. I completely agree with you.
- Guest
  
  Read the damn article.
  
  Read what the laywers wrote.
  
  The ToS is not an issue, Youtube-MP3 undertakes no copyright relevent action.
  - Wormlore
    
    That’s not a copyright action per se, but it’s still related. You have “content” that’s duplicated and distributed in a way that’s not provided by YT. But that’s all the more reason to justify Google/YouTube action.
    
    So, this YouTube-MP3 company seems to use YouTube’s content in some way that’s not expected by YT, and they pretend it allows them to ignore ToS. At best, they still apply; at worst, that’s hacking into YT data, which would be all the more illegal. You might say that this “backdoor” is YT responsibility. That doesn’t make it legal to exploit it, else you justify any kind of hacking into any kind of system on the reason that… well… there is a flaw the hacker is not responsible of, he just exploits it.
    
    Short comparison… Please excuse the limitations of a metaphor…
    Suppose you know a way into a bank’s data that doesn’t require registering as an employee. You then publish all this data, without being limited by any non-disclosure agreement… Can you really say these clauses don’t apply to you because you never signed with the bank? Well, yes you can… That doesn’t make your situation much more legal.
    - Guest
      
      Read. What. The. Fucking. Lawyers. Wrote.
    - Wormlore
      
      I did read the lawyers report. (Sorry “Guest”, I don’t have the reply button on your last post.)
      It just states that it’s not a copyright issue (point taken, if you read me), and that ToS don’t apply to the YT-MP3 company, which I disagree. They might have found a technical and/or legal loophole, but they do access YT content.
      
      As I stated before, I don’t ‘know’ how they do it, though I ‘guess’ they just play the file on their system, rip the soundstream and makes it available for download. This, in my view, allows them to ignore the API ToS, not the normal ToS. That YT made it easy for users by not requiring them to read and agree to them each and every time they connect to the site doesn’t make it right to just ignore them.
      (Plus, making a soundrip independantly available for download ‘could’ be a breach of copyright, though I agree I don’t know enough of copyright laws to conclude with any certainty.)
      
      Lastly, I find it morally wrong to act this way. That’s a purely legalist standpoint that’s an abuse of legal loopholes, which I can’t agree to.
Anon

Google added a way to download Youtube videos directly, but it still does not convert their audio contents to MP3 just like websites such as KEEPVID are doing.

FAIL.
Željko Todori?

I support Google on this. Why? Google is the most democratic
IT company around the globe. To fight a war with Google is wrong. There are other, far worse companies that should be targeted instead. Facebook is one of them – a complete jungle, animal kingdom of blindness anti-intellectualism ! Another one – Apple – and its nauseating cult of Steve Jobs.
In short, leave Google alone !
- Ishigidydigidy
  
  Turning a blind eye because they’ve turned into the “good guys” is a slippery slope. It’s very likely that they’ll continue to take their “powers” one by one until they’re as bad as the RIAA and MPAA.
- Guest
  
  Just because Google is you say the democratic IT company around the globe does not give it the right to bully and threaten someone who by the way are NOT breeching Googles TOS and copyright according to 2 judges. Google is completely in the wrong in doing what they are doing when MP3 conversion has not broken any Googles TOS or even breeched copyright. Google should be the one on the receiving of a lawsuit and one for false accusations etc.
- Guest
  
  “Google is the most democratic IT company around the globe”
  
  HAHAHAHAHAHA!
  
  Okay, first of all, I don’t recall users being able to vote on Google’s software and services. I also don’t recall Google ever particularly giving shit about what their users think. They are not democratic, and you do not know what the word “democracy” means.
  
  Second, Google’s whole business model is to spy on you and sell the data they collect to advertisers. They are spyware incarnate. They have broken laws to spy on people(see the Streetview fiasco), they have used hacks to spy on people(see bypassing Safari’s security settings). Everything they do, everything they make, is done to spy on you. They are not my friend. They are not your friend. They are not the Internet’s friend.
  
  And now they’re beginning to act like the MAFIAA. Leave them alone? I’m sorry, who’s trying to kill YouTube-MP3? Is it Facebook? Is it Apple?
  
  No. It’s Google. So I’m not going to leave them alone.
  
  Request denied.
  - ScrewEwe2
    
    Last year I signed up for Google + just to see what was is all about. The first thing I was shocked about was seeing the list of my so called friends and contacts who were supposedly fellow Google + users. There was people I hadn’t contacted for years and I was wondering how the hell Google even knew that I knew some of these people, and then I remembered I had made the mistake of allowing Google Desktop to be installed on one of my old computers I had many years ago. It was bundled with another piece of software I was installing. I was using Microshit Outlook Express at the time and had all my email contacts entered in Outlook Express and Google had gotten this information while scanning my system. I only had Google Desktop installed for half a day before I realized the privacy issues of allowing Google to know way too much about me and what was on my computer. NIt’s not Googles right to know what pre-release mp3′s or cracked programs I may or may not have. Google is a great search engine but unfortunately they have quietly been gathering way too much private information about all of us over the years. I hate Bing because I don’t want Microshit deciding for me what search results to show and Yahoo is a crap search engine. If you’re a regular computer user it’s damn near impossible to stay off the grid because our computers share a lot more information about all of us in the background than most users realize.
Pingback: YouTube-MP3 Fights Google With Lawyers and 220K+ Signature Petition – TorrentFreak | ??????
DaftMink

Okay really hope Google doesn’t encrypt YouTube’s videos because of this.
I enjoy downloading backups of my favorite fan videos.
- Guest
  
  If they were encrypted how’d we even view them? lol.
  
  It’s impossible to encrypt them without giving the users the decryption keys on the front-end. However, then it’d just be as easy as always but just a stupid attempt at DRM (just like DRM, it will be cracked within a few minutes).
Pingback: The Attorney Search » YouTube-MP3 Fights Google With Lawyers and 220K+ Signature Petition – TorrentFreak
Rekrul

As long as YouTube doesn’t implement encryption to prevent storage of
streamed content, doing so would be legal, Redlich adds, noting that the
downloading of streamed content from YouTube for private use does not
require the permission of copyright holders.

Encrypted YouTube videos in 5… 4… 3… 2… 1…
Billy Vierra

Ok I know I am going to get hated on for this, but take a min to hear me out.

First of all I hate censorship and have no issue with torrents at all.

But take a minute to think of 2 things

1) From Philips update “Downloading of streamed content from YouTube by natural persons for their private use does not currently require the consent of the copyright holder”. Now I am playing devils advocate here, but it is something Philips needs to look at, the actual connection to the youtube service is not done by ‘persons’ its done by machine. He should also make sure that he is not caching anything on his side to save BW, then he is storing it and its not by ‘persons’ for backup. The argument would be that he has advertising on his site and makes money from it thus he is doing it for profit. Had the program been installed on a persons computer, they have this argument.

2) I can guarantee the ONLY reason that Google does this is because of the pressure of getting sued by the MPAA / RIAA who will argue that since Google knew about it and did nothing Google is liable. The MPAA / RIAA would love to shut down youtube and everyone knows this. IMHO Google is stuck in a hard place here, they could probably care less about the site, however they also have to protect their interest.

I really don’t see Philips being able to win this one due to the fact that he is the one downloading and distributing them. If he only made the software that ran on a computer and none of the material that was downloaded through his servers, I think he would have a great argument. I also think that if that was the case Google would never even think of sending the cease and desist.

Also I think if Google were to take it to trial, they would take their D team. They don’t care about winning at all, they care only about being able to say they tried to respect the copyright holders interest. If they can show they sued and lost, the RIAA / MPAA has a lot smaller of case against them.

Let the flaming begin :)
- moe6
  
  You don’t deserve any flame because this is exactly what it is. The people that don’t understand this baffle me.
Jefi

Google really turned evil!
UnrealSWAT

I actually don’t see Google being in the wrong here, Google are the ones that lose out with websites such as this, Google pay to host all the content so that we can access it for free supported by ads and the like and then they also pay for the bandwidth to distribute it which given that you can get more than full 1080p videos on youtube the bandwidth must be pretty extortionate to start with. These sort of websites generate their own revenue through advertisements whilst also ripping content from Youtube. so it’s a lose/lose for google and a win/win for these third party “companies”.

It wouldn’t be so bad if Youtube-MP3 actually dontated at least part of the revenue back to Google for being a kind host but it is purely leeching Google’s resources no two ways about it.
- Guest
  
  Leeching or not this MP3 conversion site has not broken any laws in doing what it is doing, according to the lawyers for the defence the site has NOT breeched the TOS of Google because the site does not use the YouTube API and therefore As a result “..YouTube’s API
  Terms of Service do not apply here, and as no contract has been created
  which would allow for the Terms of Service to come into effect then Googles TOS has not been breeched.
  - Billy Vierra
    
    according to the lawyers that is correct, but I think the lawyers are also incorrect in their assessment. It is legal for persons to backup online media, so if this were ran from your computer (ie not proxied and converted through a 3rd party provider) then I agree with them. However I have a feeling that Google’s argument for it is going to be that since a 3rd party is downloading and converting them then forwarding them on the 3rd party does not fall under the same protections.
    
    Also if the site owner does any sort of caching (ie a specific video is being converted repeatedly so instead of re-downloading and converting it they are saving it and serving the saved file) then I would also assume this no longer falls under the protection of backing it up.
    
    Once anyone start monetizing anything like this however it is no longer just backing it up for personal use, they are selling it.
    
    As I stated before I am not saying I agree with the law or with Google, just laying it out as I see it. I also do not believe that Google wants to do this, they are just trying to keep themselves our of litigation from the MPAA / RIAA. Even if Google were to sue and lose, any argument that the MPAA / RIAA has in regards to Google knowing about this and allowing it to happen is out the window.
    
    Realistically I think if Google believes that the lawyers are correct, they will then implement the requirements to make it illegal (such as using RTMP / encoded streams) just to keep the RIAA / MPAA off their asses. Litigation is expensive and they don’t want to have to go through it on either side, but even worse than going through it is losing when being sued.
  - UnrealSWAT
    
    They are still using a service that is provided by Google and if Google don’t want over 1.3 Million potential viewers a day going to an external site and being leeched from they are well within their right to do so. The Youtube-MP3 site isn’t the only one with rights, again no contract has been created so it is down to Google to provide the service or not, they have no legal obligation to do so in the first place.
tremor

Chrome YouTube Downloader extension works great. F**k Google. Petition signed.
Metalnoid

Legal threats from Google? YouTube is owned by Google… WTF is this bullshit?
Mett

the funny thing in all that is that u plug the line-out of your pc in the line-in of another pc or any kind of rec device and u can record it.
=youtube model is originally faulty and cant seriously hope carrying on long time with this model.
ScrewEwe2

Look what happened to Kyle In the Human CentiPad South Park episode. Kyle, who apparently is one of the only people in South Park who didn’t read the iTunes TOS when upgrading iTunes, inadvertently agreed to become the middle part of Apples Human CentiPad or a “part human, part centipede, part web browser and part emailing device.”

I feel the same way as you, Screw TOS agreements.
http://profiles.google.com/scootah Sean .

I bet Google would be way less pissed at them if they ran their service as an overlay bar so you still had to look at the original page and advertising while the video played before you could download the mp3.

I suspect that the issue isn’t really about people leeching audio. It’s about Google not getting advertising revenue, but still having the same operational costs to serve the content to the guys bot when this service does the scrape.
Desu1

So what will the petition do?
Tomhermans

Who in their right mind extracts audio from YouTube?
And why not just you know buy the track instead of stealing it?
It’s not that you haven’t got the best pre-listen ( w vid & everything) already..
Sad ppl..
Mark

Goodbye Youtube-MP3! ;)
http://danielj.se MaTachi

If you don’t want to share your content – don’t put it on the Internet.
savas101

I
- savas101
  
  If Google just simply provided the mp3 version, nobody would bother going to these sites. I guess that would reduce hits. They would rather pay lawyers to settle it.
  
  That’s when you know Google will eventually fall, just like the rest of them that are going down this path. You can’t win against the numbers. The solution is to come up with something better. Just like how Google started. I guess all the new guys there are just the yes men now.
cipnr korvo

What’s wrong with google?? For a while it seemed they were on our side!
They did help us fight against SOPA/PIPA/ACTA.
Maybe in the end it’s just another fat corporation like all the others and just helped us fight because they knew it would get them publicity…
Will P

I use this tool but not even for piracy. I use it to create podcasts from videos so I can listen to them on my mp3 player.
Xeno

Guys… Google is in this to make money, if you take a video and store its mp3 locally, google makes no money from the follow up plays. Also, this was just to easy, none of you should be surprised that it got taken down. Like a song on Youtube? Youtube-mp3 it, no purchase necessary.
http://www.facebook.com/banni.chatrji Banni Chatrji

See www.worldfloat.com the next facebook..Travel virtually 1600+ cities while sitting on your seat and social network.http://youtu.be/bh8UlOpRO6g
http://pennystockfinders.com/ Luella Allred

The demand for YouTube-MP3.org to bring about a cessation of its service is therefore unfounded,” Solmecke writes.

TorrentFreak

The place where breaking news, BitTorrent and copyright collide

YouTube-MP3 Fights Google With Lawyers and 220K+ Signature Petition

Credit: Ioannis Milionis (mycartoons.de)

Related Posts

Previous Post | Next Post

NewsBits

Pirate Bay Founder Gottfrid Svartholm on Freedom of Speech

Blu-ray Anti-Piracy Tech Stops Discs and Promotes Purchases

Foxtel Breeds Pirates by Locking Up Game of Thrones

UK Student Admits Breaching Sony Copyrights With Leak of PS3 SDK

Pirates Can Be Identified Despite Sharing IP Addresses, ISP Claims

MostDiscussed

Pirate Bay Takes Over Distribution of Censored 3D Printable Gun

McAfee Patents Technology to Detect and Block Pirated Content

Pirate Bay Finds Safe Haven in Iceland, Switches to .IS Domain

Copyright Trolls Threaten to Call Neighbors of Accused Porn Pirates

Game Pirates Whine About Piracy in Game Dev Simulator

CopyQuote

PopularArticles

VPN Services That Take Your Anonymity Seriously, 2013 Edition

Top 10 Most Popular Torrent Sites of 2013

Which VPN Service Providers Really Take Anonymity Seriously?

What’s The Best VPN / Proxy for BitTorrent?

BTGuard Review: How Does it Work?

Optimize Your BitTorrent Download Speed

The place where breaking news, BitTorrent and copyright collide

Search TorrentFreak

Credit: Ioannis Milionis (mycartoons.de)

Related Posts

NewsBits

MostDiscussed

CopyQuote

PopularArticles