Is it illegal to download things that aren't meant to be downloaded?
Quite frequently I come across scanned books that are viewable for free online. For example, the publisher put them there (such as preview chapters), a library (old books from their collection that are in public domain), etc. Since I like hoarding data, and the online viewers that are used to present the book to me might not be very practical, I frequently try to download the books one way or another. This requires toying with the "inspect element" tool and various other methods of getting the images/PDF. Now, all that I access is what is, well, accessible; I don't hack into the servers or something. But - the stuff is meant to be hidden from the normal user. Does that act of hiding the material, no matter how primitive and easily circumvented, mean that I'm not allowed to access it at all?
I suppose ripping a public domain book is no big deal, but would books under copyright fare differently?
Mainly I'm asking out of curiosity, I don't expect the police to come visit me for ripping a 16th century dictionary.
Note: I live in EU, but I'd be curious to hear how this is treated elsewhere too.
Edit: I also remembered a funny trick I noticed on one site - it allows viewing PDFs on their website, but not downloading, unless you pay for the PDF. But when you load the page, even without paying, the PDF is already downloaded onto your computer and can be found in the browser cache. Is it legal to simply save the file that is already on your computer?
AFAIK web scraping (the act of grabbing and downloading any data you see available on the internet) isn't illegal, and I would assume downloading PDFs provided to you online would fall under that. Since it is copyrighted it would probably be illegal to share it, though.
This. In a case around LinkedIn courts ruled that in the US it’s legal to scrape publicly available data. The company doing the scraping was selling that data to corporate customers, but ultimately use might depend on the information you’re accessing and under what permissions. (Not a lawyer)
What if I web scraped something like a pirate site full of all the good media?
If you scraped a pirate site and stored a bunch of links to copyrighted content you'd probably be fine, actually using those links to download or share copyrighted content is what's illegal. It'd be like buying the stuff to make a bomb or drugs, but then not making any bombs or drugs.
That being said, while not necessarily illegal, I wouldn't want authorities to find my bomb and drug ingredients, or my scraped piracy links, as I'd probably have some 'splainin to do.
(Not a lawyer)
Why can I scrape the content from one place and not another?
Who said that you can't scrape content from the other place?
If you're referring to the last line, I say I wouldn't want authorities to find it because I don't want to have to explain it. I'm 99% sure someone would not just store links to a bunch of pirated content for fun, they probably have accessed said pirated content, now you have to explain to the authorities why you have links to pirated content without implicating yourself in copyright infringement.
Like I said, probably fine, I just wouldn't want the hassle if I somehow got caught.
Why links and not video?
Sorry man, I'm not exactly sure what you're asking.
If you are able to load the content on your computer without infringing copyright laws, you're allowed to circumvent whatever the website has in place to store whatever data you would like from whatever website you would like, regardless of the nature of the site, so long as the content is legal (is not CP) and again not being presented in a way that infringes aforementioned copyright laws.
If you're asking why the copyright laws exist, I can't really help you with that one.
According to the big tech its ok if you're training large language model with it.
You're confusing the law that applies for the ruling class with the one that applies to common people
There's a law for the ruling class? I always figured they gotta just cut their political buddies in.
My brain is essentially an enormous language model.
Unironically yes, you would not know who Spiderman was without viewing a copyrighted work demonstrating what he looks like, and now you understand while generative AI fundamentally has to ingest copyrighted works.
If you can see it, you've already downloaded it. You're just chosing to retain it.
As with everything with the law, it depends.
In Australia, distribution is the illegal part, seeding/sharing is where they get you. Not the actual download itself.
It's usually not a question of legality, but efficiency.
It's easy and efficient to bust someone for seeding, but busting hundreds for the odd file you can prove they downloaded is expensive and takes forever.
And might well not be legally possible if all you have is an IP address, because lest we forget:
If you are viewing it on your computer, you have already downloaded it.
Don't let anyone tell you otherwise.
Exactly.
Ask the AI companies who scraped my sites while the media companies were DCMA-ing everything in sight and working with enforcement paid for with publuc funds to prosecute/persecute the "pirates".
It's ridiculous that Homeland Security is spending resources taking down pirate sites. That's a department specifically created to prevent terrorism, and instead they're operating as Pinkertons for broadcasting companies.
You wouldn't download a car...
Nooo never...
You wouldn't steal a baby..
You're right! Babies take way too much work to raise properly.
You might not.
https://m.imdb.com/title/tt0093822/
I'd say if the copyright holder says you're not allowed to then you're not. It's piracy.
People will tell you that you've already downloaded the data so saving it is fundamentally, technically no different, but that doesn't matter to the law, it's still piracy.
Like yeah, it's absurd and pointless and anti-consumer and anti-knowledge and unenforceable and unsustainable, but that's copyright. It's always been that way.
Copyright destroys culture and piracy is our ethical duty in the face of that. The only reason to care about it is so you don't get caught.
What about AI? Don't they basically do exactly this.
Sure, and I'd say that's piracy too. I wouldn't mind if it wasn't also being siloed into private hands to enrich the wealthy and screw the rest of us.
Not an expert, but in the U.S. making a copy of a broadcast for personal use is legal under fair-use. Anything that loads up on your computer screen you can make a copy and save it for personal use. So screen captures are by definition legal.
How exactly you copy the material on your screen gets tricky under the DMCA clusterfuck. Breaking encryption to copy the material is illegal unless there is an valid exception for fair-use. What exactly those valid exceptions are is above my paygrade.
The laws are bullshit and shouldn't be followed. Information should be free to all
I never said I follow the law, I'm just wondering what the law says ;)
Laws of course differ from country to country but generally if it is legally publicly available then no, it at best violates their EULA or something if you scrap such data. A company trying to prevent direct downloads cannot really charge you for you finding ways around that, because from a technical point of view the data was already cached onto your PC anyway.
As a tip, use the browsers F12 console's Network tab, instead of inspect element. For videos you may also try the absolute right click addon. It breaks the video player controls when enabled but often you can just right click save video if it isn't timed out and you can also enable regular controls via right click show controls. Tools like JDownloader2 can also often scrap various files but the former methods may work better.
There's also the video download helper add-on for Firefox that will allow you to download streams that aren't just media files your browser can http get. Though your browser can still access those streams, it needs a script component to handle it, so the built in file downloader/saver won't even see it as a thing to download.
That one is scummy as hell.
How so?
Just check the reviews, or the permissions.
Reviews say it's adding a giant QR code to downloaded videos to get people to pay a license fee but I do not see that after downloading something just now. Though tbf, they did update it yesterday and might have removed that because of the feedback they were getting.
Permissions look reasonable to me, based on my understanding of what they need to do for the functionality, though I suppose there is potential for abuse.
It requires a companion desktop program for some streams, which did seem sketchy at first but I wasn't able to find any specific claims of it doing anything undesired, just people who noped out when they saw it wanted them to install something and others who said it does function as desired. Again, hard to say if it does anything in addition to enabling some streams to be downloaded, but I haven't noticed anything out of place on my PC since installing it either from tool-based scans or manual checks of places where malware can put itself to survive restarts.
There were also claims that it didn't work with YouTube in the reviews, but that doesn't seem to be the case for me, since it does light up. Though maybe that was timing-based, too, where Google briefly managed to block it only for them to adjust.
So I haven't seen any of those issues but YMMV. I'm going to keep using it but will also keep an eye on it. Either way, thanks for letting me know.
Everything on the Internet can be downloaded, copied etc
You care more than all of the ‘AI’ companies combined
Depends on where you are. Usually if it's a legal source, you can save it. But you're not supposed to share it unless given permission. If you downloaded it from a source that's not legal, things might change, depending on the specifics of your law.
It might be illegal to post it without permission, but you can download it all you damn well please and they can't stop you. Unless it's like government top secret something or other. In that case you probably don't want it anywhere near your computer and should probably tell somebody where you found it.
Somebody, as in your lawyer. Who can then inform the correct authorities, while making sure you don't become their scapegoat.
Warthunder discord server lol
Astonishing listening to the news coverage of that story where the anchors were reading some terminally online nonsense from the teleprompter about Discord "Thug Shakers"
Mind posting a guide on how you tinker with those inspect element tools?
Right click -> inspect element (Q) works.
You can also press F12.
And if right click is blocked, on Firefox holding SHIFT will unblock right click. There is also a plugin that does this for you.
Often websites will put an invisible element in front of the content to intercept this trick, but you can navigate through the elements to find the one they were trying to obfuscate.
Also you can just block elements you right click on in Firefox (though this might be an option added by an add-on). If there's hidden elements you just need to go through each of those until you can click on the one you want directly (and you can tell by what is highlighted in the inspect element mode).
You can also hit delete in inspect element mode to remove that element. You can also edit whatever you want in the element. Makes me wish it existed back when I was doing more web dev work, would have made things a lot easier when debugging.
(Sorry for the late response.) Well it depends a lot on the site. Since I focus on books and scholarly articles, the ideal way is to find the URL of the original PDF. The website might show you just individual pages as images, but it might hide the link to the PDF somewhere in the code. Alternatively, you might just obtain all the URLs of the individual page images, put them all into a download manager, and later bundle them all into a new PDF. (When you open the "inspect element" window, you just have to figure out which part of the code is meant to display the pages/images to you.) Sometimes the PDFs and page images can be found in your browser cache, as I mention in the OP. There's quite some variety among the different sites, but with even the most rudimentary knowledge of web design you should be able to figure out most of them.
If need help with ripping something in particular, DM me and I'll give it a try.
If it's in the public domain, it's almost certainly legal. I don't have the general answer to your question.
Really this question shows how outdated copyright law is; in many countries it prohibits "copying", but in the age of computers nearly all accessing of information involves "copying" it in some way.
They aren’t going after the hoarders, they are going after the sharers.
If something is in the public domain, there is no copyright covering it, so you should make as many copies as you feel like. Many public domain books are posted on the Internet Archive, where you can easily download them in various formats. Then you won't have to work hard to get the data. Public domain artwork, likewise, is often available on Wikimedia Commons.
Digital tools as you've described could be used by the service to manage access to content. A book's author or publisher may object to the book being available for free. There may be limits on the amount of time you can read a book. Some content may be public domain but there may be versions of that content which the publisher has altered to in some way making some portions of the book not public domain.
Knowingly possessing something that was not freely provided to you or the public by the licensed owner, or otherwise known to be unprotected by copyright, is not legal. Just because a file is cached on your device does not mean you are the legal owner of that content forever.
There's a number of reasons you may be charged to download a pdf. It could be a means of legally granting ownership and sharing revenue with the content owner. It could be because the authorized provider of the content is simply charging to maintain the service you've acquired the content from. It could be both or it could be a sketchy website just trying to get your CC info.
This is coming from the perspective of someone in the US. I'm not sure about the rest of the world but imagine basic copyright laws are similar around the world.
Honestly much of your reply is confusing me and doesn't seem to be relevant to my questions. This is what I think is crucial:
What does being "the legal owner forever" actually entail, either with regards to a physical book or its scan? And what does that mean regarding what I can legally do with the cached file on my computer?
If you have legally obtained something, you have agreed to the terms of ownership with the provider / owner / creator of the content. Whether you find a document on your computer or you have paid for it, it does not explicitly give you full ownership of that data forever.
For example: if you buy a DVD from a store, you're actually purchasing a license to watch the content of that DVD. If you were to give or sell that disc to someone else, you are transferring your permission to watch that disc to them. So, if you were to rip that movie to your computer, legally - you only have permission to watch that for as long as you are in possession of that physical media.
Conversely, if you were to "buy" a movie from an online platform, they may relinquish your right to watch that movie if the publisher of that content (or a government agency) no longer permits them to stream that content to you. If you were to download that movie, that does not change the agreement you made with the service to watch it. This is why it's not possible to save an iTunes video purchase to your computer in a non-encrypted format.
In other words, you've got to read the terms and conditions. Even then, they may change the terms and conditions of the agreement.
Terms and conditions are NOT copyright law. They are a separate agreement that is the companies "wishlist" of things they want the consumer to agree too. It's common for them to spell out terms in direct conflict with copyright law.
The reason that an iTunes video purchase is encrypted is because it is illegal to break the encryption in order to make a copy (DMCA). However capturing the playback and transforming it to another medium is for personal use is fair-use.
There is also no time limit to how long a person can save the copy for. As long as they had legal access to the content at the time of making the copy. For example say I recorded a football game from a streaming service. I can save that copy for personal use for the rest of my life even though I purchased a one time only streaming.
Sure. Regardless, their terms and conditions should give you some idea of how they're using technology to permit and/or restrict access.
FTFY
I don't think content providers are encrypting things because it's illegal to decrypt things. They're encrypting things because the content producers (movie studios) want to ensure that (1) they're getting paid for the content, (1B) it's not given away for free and, (2) they're in business to make money.
To my knowledge, there are no laws about making copies. Breaking encryption is illegal because the encryption itself is protected under law. Selling copies is illegal. Playing copies of something for which you are not permitted or do not legally own a license to watch is illegal. So, if you make a copy of a cassette tape, legal; profiting from that copy, illegal.
Copyright law is not contract law.
Some items have time limits - such as renting a movie from iTunes or Amazon or borrowing a book from a physical or digital library. You are entering a contract with the provider where they grant you temporary access to something. If you were to make a copy of something you were given temporary access to, you are breaking the contract.
I don't know what the agreement is for football organizations or your content provider. If you're breaking broadcast or HDMI encryption to record a stream, that's illegal. If you're somehow bypassing encryption, that is probably legal. I do know that it's illegal to re-broadcast the content in public and to resell that program. There are also some fair use rules (in the US) which permit limited use for commentary and education purposes.