• Communist@lemmy.frozeninferno.xyz
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    0
    ·
    2 months ago

    …except that’s violating youtubes terms of service, and skipping paying the content creators.

    Which makes it for all intents and purposes piracy.

    • 2pt_perversion@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      0
      ·
      2 months ago

      A restaurant has a sign that says “no shirt no shoes no service”. I walk in barefoot and order a burger. They serve me the burger. They had the right to deny me but they served me anyway. The responsibly to enforce their own terms of service is on them. Similarly youtube has the right to deny service to people blocking ads and sometimes does. That does not make ad blocking piracy for all intents and purposes. The onus to enforce their own terms of service is on them. And it would be very easy for them to take more drastic measures but they don’t.

      I get that you’re trying to make an argument that morally it can feel like piracy, but it’s just not actually piracy. No copyright was violated. Youtube’s TOS doesn’t change that.

      • Communist@lemmy.frozeninferno.xyz
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        0
        ·
        2 months ago

        It’s actually not easy for them to take more drastic measures, and they’re actively working on enforcing it.

        The part where the content creator doesn’t get paid and is supposed to according to the rules of the platform that you’re violating is the part where it’s piracy.