• AbelianGrape@beehaw.org
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      4
      ·
      1 year ago

      They’ve (convincingly) followed up above. I’m hoping the contributors to Invidious can clear this up. If no one replies here, I’ll open an issue on Invidious’ GitHub page asking that clarification be added to the readme on how their YoutubeAPI wrapper is not using an official YouTube API.

        • AbelianGrape@beehaw.org
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          2
          ·
          1 year ago

          I’ve replied to that, I’m not satisfied. It’s a bit of a wall of text though.

          TL;DR: “clean room reverse engineering” has a specific definition and I don’t believe it applies here. I do believe that the cited TOS applies to an internal API endpoint which is publicly accessible. Both things spell trouble.

          I also take issue with the phrase “does not use official YouTube APIs” in the readme, but maybe that’s pedantry between “official” and “documented.”