Honesty i have only tried torrents 3-4 times so I don’t know much about them, othr than they are peiced together from multiple sources so any assumptions I have could vewry well be in correct!

Now reread your own words and insert TPB where you put YouTube.

That would be an incorrect assumption.
Even if TPB were closed down those same
torrents would still be easily found via Google searches.

Besides, EMI has made a lot of noise about it’s ‘partnership’ with Google, which would
mean a lot of EMI content would be showing up on YouTube, legally … see where I am going
with this … EMI allows EMI content to be put up, and THEN has to have their content pulled ?

No, they will sue to keep their advantage rather than allow someone to get their music for ‘free’
for use outside of YouTube.

It doesn’t make sense to anyone but a record label exec.

TPB is just an aggregator of torrents.
Same thing.

If it is used to get copies of RIAA member songs that are on YouTube for free,
do you honestly think the labels will allow it to live ?

Legal or illegal has never been a factor for the RIAA member labels.
What matters is that there are enough ‘if’s ‘ in the equation to allow the
RIAA members to use their financial weight to sue it out of existence.

Can a lone teenager afford to fight them ?

I doubt it.

I fully expect to hear about a lawsuit within a month.

But, you go right ahead and keep supporting them David.
It’s people that continue to insist on giving them money, whether by buying or
supporting DRM clogged ‘rental’ sites that give them the money to eliminate
stuff like this, that even you can see should be perfectly legal.

The fact that the developer is just some guy. A teenager, no less.
This says something about where we are as a “civilization” — when corporate megaliths pretend to understand open technology (by putlicizing their API and such), but then feel free to bitch about what people create with it.

Fitch: as usual, you’re spot-on in regard to copyright etc. (I’d love to see a debate between you and a copyright apologist, btw.)

Also, there’s something really inspirational about the fact that the developer of this isn’t some multi-billion-dollar corporate R&D lab somewhere that “needs” twenty years of monopoly ‘protection’ via patent to provide “incentive to innovate”.

If capitalism is so innovative, why is the MOST innovative stuff lately happening in areas with relatively lax Intellectual monopolies (like open APIs, FOSS software, etc.?), with at least a version of it being offered gratis, and — at most — a “premium” version being sold?

I mean, come on — recent history flies in the face of all the fashionable propaganda about how innovation works.

Glad people are waking up, however.

“On a preliminary review, however, it appears that the site violates our API terms of use.”

Go right ahead

But, I can’t help thinking the “copyright” issue may only be a smokescreen in this case, as interested parties scramble to figure out how to avoid the possible lost AD REVENUE from eliminating some middlemen in the click process.

Playing the audio in a sequence of YouTube clips offends YouTube? or those possessing the unethical privilege of Copyright?

Copyright is a crime against humanity. Do not accept it. Assert your human right to free speech and cultural liberty.