We need to develop something to save CC-licensed videos from YouTube!

The title says most of it. We must find a new way to archive CC licensed youtube videos and this may be a combination of p2p, central and decentralised. You may think that we already have those options and very less people use them right? Partly right. Let me explain what more needs to be done.

What we have now : We have sites like peertube (p2p), dtube (combination of p2p, decentralized & supports centralized through youtube itself). We also have archive.org project which is great but only allows ‘educational’, ‘historical’ and videos that are unlicensed.

Why did we even make these technologies? : Platforms like YouTube, Vimeo and others are based on servers hosted by a single company. Let’s assume that tomorrow there is a world war that ends up make USA loose the war. Companies like YouTube will fail to exist and it’s 100% likely that even before people start backing up the videos, the servers will be gone. This is a legitimate reason and that’s why companies like Microsoft made their GitHub Artic Vault project! You see, even the people working in many companies worry about data retention. We have already lost a lot of data from places that were perfectly great and became a war torn place within a day.

Problem with current systems : DTube, PeerTube, Mastadon etc. etc., there are a lot and none of them actually tackle the core problem. The core issue is not about ‘how to make decentralized or p2p sharing service’. We already know this for about a damn decade. The problem is about licenses and copyright laws. This has been an issue for more than a decade and the reason why there was a war on the internet in early 2000’s. The open source community, the hacker community and the scientist community came together against acts like SOPA and eventually with luck p2p sharing was not completely illegalized. Recently FBI (of USA) prepared a statement saying that p2p has a minimum effect on creators and entertainment industry as well as developers and companies developing propreitory systems (because most of the propreitory systems inject ads and sell data of users anyway and companies like Microsoft actually prefer piracy to continue because they have occupied countries like China, Russia, India etc., with their spyware).

What needs to be done : Projects like Archive.org have given us a way and we must create systems based on their legal terminology and start archiving at-least the videos that are licensed in CC (creative commons). Now we cannot directly archive CC videos, but CC makes it perfectly easy for creators to partner with our platform and give permissions to automatically archive their uploads without them having to join another platform.Right now platforms like Dtube make it hell of a difficult task to archive anything because the creator needs to register an account there. The idea here is to create another archive and caching project for videos with CC license. Once the creator agrees and gives permission via a form or an email officially admissible in court, then the archive project will automatically archive all their videos. Creator will never need to interact or reply to any email in the future.

Let’s see if someone takes this further. Current systems don’t solve the main issue at all. With these half baked websites that assume they’ve solved the main issue, might as well use youtube directly.

1 Like

When that happens, the world will have different issues and would not care about YouTube videos.

I see, that you should research how huge billion dollar companies deal with data retention. To make Google’s data disappear, you’d have to nuke the entire world and there would probably still remain some secret vault deep in the underground, where Google saved all the information on tapes that last a thousand years. You really do not need to worry about data retention in huge billion dollar companies.

This would never work the way you imagine. In reality, 90% of people addressed by such e-mails wouldn’t read or respond, in the first place. Further 9% would probably decline, as they do not want their videos watchable on third party platforms, without ad income.

If you are talking about truly free videos (CC licenses of all kinds), then the producers of such videos almost always host it somewhere else, as well and not only on YouTube, which is just natural.

Because of the resons above, it’s already close to impossible to achieve what you are demanding.

Now, the second reason why it’s practically impossible.

You’d need tons of money. Like, literal tons of money. Money amounts that literally weigh tons.

The only entities which would be able to reasonably spend such huge amounts for such videos would be, for example, Google.

And now we are back at the beginning. Google is pretty much the redundancy you look for, even if it’s not a free solution. It’s the only solution that is currently feasible.

As explained above, it is obvious you really need to do research on the basics of the topics you mentioned. For example, how a company like Google handles data retention. How safe the data is (from a purely technical perspective) on Google data centres.
Then you would need to understand the monetary cost behind such demand and how little it would help.

Additionally, you are mistaking YouTube alternatives for archiving platforms focusing on YouTube. That’s not the reason they exist. The real reason they exist in the first place is censorship.
Those alternatives you mentioned are there to protect creators and consumers from censorship. According to the current Google (YouTube) “community guidelines” and other rules, YouTube can delete all videos they do not like and permanently terminate any account, that they do not like. This is the reason we have the alternatives. It’s not because of data redundancy, or whatever.

I hope, I explained well enough for you to understand, that you need to do tons more research on these topics and that your assumptions as well as demands are neither realistic nor do they make sense, in any way.


I think the root of your thought train is reasonable, but the train leads in the wrong direction. By proposing to add a middle man to such a backup/archiving/availability process, virtually infinite cost, time and friction, in general, is added, which makes this proposal highly inefficient and just unrealistic.

If you really want to have a working idea that is actually realisable, then you need to think pragmatically. First of all, start with what we already have.
Start with people making their own backups. Whoever releases content, could put it in a safe (decentralised) place and keep it available, free to access.
Now, how do you make people back up their stuff in this way? For example, you could raise awareness about it and teach those, who have put little thought in such a process, yet.
On the other hand, you can additionally provide a platform for people to use, so they can back up their stuff and keep it available.

Since you are also talking a lot about copyright law, etc., which you say is your main concern, then you would probably also need a movement which fights for better laws. I mean, if the laws are so crappy, there is no way around making them better. It probably won’t help a lot to make a Peertube like clone, just to face the same issues with laws blocking availability.

So, as you see, it’s not that simple and you definitely need to flesh out where you are going with this. I have little knowledge about the law side of things, so perhaps there is an error in the assumptions you made about them, too. That, I do not know.

If you want to achieve anything with your idea, you really need to research all those topics, to be able to assess the situation properly. Else, it will never work.

1 Like

Copyright laws are so shitty now, yet none of us can go anywhere without being photographed. CCTV for one thing, never had a say in the installation of, let alone a letter saying about whether we agree to be filmed, or our photo taken. Surely the law should be that I own said rights, as permissions were not granted by myself or whoever I’m with??
I used to busk during Cowes Week, never got asked by the general public if they could take our photo, or video us playing a song, they just went ahead and done so, as taking photos or video of people is as free as speech. Yet you go into a shop and film without permission, they don’t like it. Why can’t I as an individual have the same rights to say no to people, or at least grab the original photo or video footage off their phone or camera for myself and delete it off their equipment after I’ve saved it onto mine? Meaning they will have to pay me for a copy. Unfortunately it does not work like that, since everyone with a camera is the paparazzi these days.

For me copyright cuts both ways, should be the same for seeing bands live too, the artist owns the film and music rights that Joe and Jane Blogs has taken of them.

YouTube videos or creators of such videos, get hammered even more for copyright, music and film dating back to the 1920’s is even copyrighted, not so much by the companies who made the films or the bands that made the music, but modern proprietary companies who bought up the copyright of such material, so it does not get stolen or abused by creators who want to use said song in their videos. Yet you are allowed to use material, if you show it in a different way, differently to how it is originally.

I really hate the new rules and regulations, as Copyright proprietary companies are suing people left right and centre and the problem is, is this modern way of life is way too reliant on bots to sort out any problems. I had a conversation with a bot about an item that did not get delivered from Amazon, got a refund. Yet I thought I was talking to a human, but I should of realised, as the name of the Bot was called Gertrude, but then again the names parents call their kids these days, like Sky, Lampshade, Darkness, Illinois, September, Winter, Bed Spring. Okay I exaggerated a bit, but goes to show how reliant the world has become on technology, because AI is faster and easier than talking to a proper human, in the Corps eyes when the shit hits the fan, they rather have you their customer talk to a Bot, passing the buck over to technology, that can take abuse from customers.
As much as I like technology I hate it too, as the Internet has become an advert and unfortunately we are it’s product that gets advertised. I remember when the Internet was the Internet and none of this proprietary owned crap that we all have to put up with today. Sorry for my rant, but sometimes I just want the world to stop and let me off for a while, but I keep missing my stop, stuck at the back of the ever growing bus. :grin: