There are few legal differences.

1. in cache its harder for the average nontech person to access a cached video outside the website. Additionay in cache it’s considered a temporary store to help aid the service than a permament one.

2. When you download a video on Youtube it is probally against their terms of use while doing the same on Peertube seem widely permited by the playform based on the license the user uses. There are fewer Peertube videos that dont allow downloads then do.

With that said, a concerning amount of them have unknown selected as their license. So its hard to tell most of the time when its ok with the creator to download and if their ok/cool with it.

YouTube or Peertube? Now on Youtube, things are meant to be more corporate, while on Peertube, it is its own platform, and it is open source.

Makes sense. But when you add in the license that Peertube has available for creators to use for their videos, then the rules become more global I would assume. Might be wrong there.

The original uploader in particular would be the person sueing, i’m not really worried about the instance itself, since Peertube over all is opensource. They would probably sue the person downloading the work, although unlikely it could happen atleast legally.

One thing to add that I just found and looked into is that Peertube does seem to have a way to sort by license, atleast on sepia search, which is like a global search for most Peertube instance, though probally not every video gets featured on all instances ever made. So that seems to suggest even more that is is case by case basis whether it is legal to just go and download the videos freely.

My other concern is that not every video upload has a license submitted, those videos uploaded to a Peertube instance, that say that the license is ‘unknown’ it’s due to the uploader not deciding and that just complicates things further for whether it’s okay or not okay to download the video.

If we are going for this fediverse and opensource thing especially with video, legal use like this need to be looked into, simplified and more talked about so people can rest assured they are in the right legally. Even if the uploader might not be as likely do anything, it’s still an unknown license and that could leave people vulnerable especally in more creative cases especially when they reupload with little fair use to there aid.

That would apply if its scheduled like on tv but that wouldnt work if for standard video uploads would it?

I was thinking since most on peertube don’t tend to seek revenue from ads, so should it be acceptable? Peertube itself is opensource.

In summary i’m really asking for whether if it should be acceptable or not. Maybe it varies from uploader to uploader, but even then channels dont tend to state their own stance on this.

Dolar tree, they will always have my back in this economy. 100 tea bags of green tea for 1.25 i’m set for a few months atleast on tea without paying anything. the upfront price for that item alone was $1.25

I don’t think it would be illegal unless it’s a Chromebook they lended to you directly to work at the company. If you went to a store and bought it your self it’s perfectly legal to throw ubuntu on that Chromebook.

Here’s where things start to get harder though…

Whether they will fire you… eh idk if I would take that risk. But if anything just ask the people working there for their opinion on it.

I don’t think it’s really changed, maybe it’s just your perception of it. It’s just as addictiv today as it was last year as I see it.

I will with you halfway through with this, here is how I view it.

If you have little experience with telling between safe sources and sketchy, then yes, stick with the defualt.

If ypuu know about some safe appstores or repositories then that’s when you could say you are qualified to make thes decisions. Like I know Fdroid is safer and better than the defialt on everyway for the users best interest, but if you dont know your sources then you should not sidelode untill you do know how to make good decisions.

That’s different then the owner off the defualt android appstore telling you. If a device manufactuer did say this, i’d question why.

Did google pay them to?? or more specific to your comment did microsoft pay them

Just one question,are you certian all of them are seeing record profits, sure the big names like kroger might be but what about the smaller ones.

He doesnt want to name specific types of people or it might make it seem like google attacking specific people. So instead all users get bundled in this. They will use the most careless users as a reason to take it away from all users. It benefits them.

I think that Google really just wants to get less and less people to sideload and then shame others that do through public shaming. ‘oh that’s dangersous son; you shouldn’t be sideloading that Fdroid app! Google said so.’ That’s why they brought it up to begin with, this is as google goes over court with epic games over the app store fee.

I meant as a user, go ahead and switch to it. But to rid of the monopoly, they nee competition. No one is creating that for normies who don’t know how to Linux. If Linux phones make their way into walmarts and targets, then maybeee. It has to be as simple as buy it, and use it. like how you buy a Nintendo switch and it just works.

I think it’s news as they say it as they are in court against epic games about their Google play store.

Want to know why they might really be saying to not sideload apps, because they are saying without saying it “screw you epic games, screw you 3rd party YouTube clients that get rid of our ads and screw you f-droid for offering something to people for free that isn’t piracy, now we have to compete with that and make good products, or do we mwahaha.”

That’s ultamately what they want you to do. to give up on f-droid, and alternative app clients, and alternative free apps in general.

oh oh. a new tech war is coming for independant app developers.

I hope this doesn’t lead to Google to keep saying this repeativly for awhile and eventually removing the feature to side loading apps in the feature, them saying saying something like ‘sideloading an old outdated way we use to use the internet and it has security flaws’

They really just want to kill f-droid. Once they do that, it gets harder to block Youtube ads after all. Apps like new pipe would have to find a new home.

Are devs people going to wake up and make a new commercial os that will actual compete with android and iOS? no a new Linux distro is not going to come anywhere close to even, Macos marketshare. It needs to be new, and needs to be preloaded on computers and sell in stores. It needs to be simple.

I don’t use AdBlock, I use Peertube. no ads by defualt. Never had any problems with YouTube knocking at my door.

Peertube, while empty at the content level, there are some known YouTubers who have a presence there. Especially Linux and open source YouTubers. But you will always find new people who only post on Peertube.

I would say that, for people that might be struggling with being attracted to kids, and are trying to stop or change that habbit this type of community would be a good start for them because atleast they are trying to an extent to be legal. As long that the people involved are of legal age, then it shouldn’t be problematic. That’s like if I were to ask this question;

There are some kids at highschool at age 15 that look older, is that problematic? If there were actual minors on the communitiy however, that would actually be a legal concern. But it would have to be knowingly if i’m not mistaken that they are actually underage. If whether you know or not their a minor, even if they lie about their age is a legal concern correct in replies. But then in that case any relationship could be at legal risk if the other person lies to you and is under age.