I suspect this is why:
> Ever wished you could save a video from the Internet? Search no more, Downie is what you're looking for. Easily download videos from thousands of different sites.
> Ever wished you could save a video from the Internet? Search no more, Downie is what you're looking for. Easily download videos from thousands of different sites.
Nope. Creating a tool perceived by those with enough lawyers to be a “copy protection circumvention device” however does run afoul of the DMCA.
Reminds me of YouTube blocking Blender videos... had other reasons though, don't remember exactly, but it had to do with them not monetizing their videos and really, really bad support.
https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=17347560
Basically they needed to enable monetization since [I assume] Google was taking a non-negligible loss by hosting all of their content for free.
It's not necessarily the law, either. Panicky industry heavyweights may lobby to make it a law, or try to confuse a given tech with copyright infringement, but "downloading videos" is not against the law.
The dev's website includes a screenshot of it downloading a bunch of Disney material. That is not a wasp nest I want to shake.
If it breaks actual encryption (a la DeCSS) then yes, it oversteps.
But TV content stakeholders don't have much pull with convincing VCR manufacturers/distributors to stop supplying VCRs. Apple does clearly have the ability to affect the signing of software.
I'd counter that if the audio and video get to your eyes and ears, then the content provider has already provided you a decrypted copy of the media and/or the instructions for how to decrypt.
If you had an arms' length valid agreement with the company where you agree not to retain the media, then that's different issue.
Don't some jurisdictions have provisions that allow for technical workarounds in order to make backups?
It's actually computers that allow you to do this. I think this is why there's a war (of sorts) against general purpose computers: they enable you, the user, to do all sorts of things publishers didn't envision or want.
* a lawyer sends a DMCA request to Youtube
* a Youtube bot looks at the offending request and finds a user agent
* Kicks off automated warning to Apple bot
* Apple bot shuts down developer account
All that's really needed here is a bot to post these things to Twitter and HackerNews and then an API for the service bots to read the complaints and undo the action with a phony apology post
"The following restrictions apply to your use of the Service. You are not allowed to:
access, reproduce, download, distribute, transmit, broadcast, display, sell, license, alter, modify or otherwise use any part of the Service or any Content except: (a) as expressly authorized by the Service; or (b) with prior written permission from YouTube and, if applicable, the respective rights holders;"
Is the Transmission torrent client next because it could be used to download copyrighted content?
5.2.3 Audio/Video Downloading: Apps should not facilitate illegal file sharing or include the ability to save, convert, or download media from third-party sources (e.g. Apple Music, YouTube, SoundCloud, Vimeo, etc.) without explicit authorization from those sources. Streaming of audio/video content may also violate Terms of Use, so be sure to check before your app accesses those services. Documentation must be provided upon request.
https://developer.apple.com/app-store/review/guidelines/#int...
As to the why, because Apple could be sued by third parties for allowing this behavior for apps that Apple has vetted.
though if it was that you'd think they would just pull the app and ask him to rename it...
In any AppStore app, everything is literally Apple's business, considering they get a cut of any money that changes hands and can reject your app for "looking at them wrong".
That's why the whole model is (rightly) controversial.
But the true controversy is not a curated store, the controversy is that the curated store is the only way for people to load native code onto the device without compiling it themselves on a separate laptop.
>The developer's website (software.charliemonroe.net) is blocked by my ISP (Vodafone UK)'s adult content filter. This is strange as it does not appear to contain any adult content.
would explain a lot. In order to download from a pr0n website you need to hardcode that websites domain name inside the program = pr0n filters pick it up = Apple bans it.