
Ask HN: YouTube threatening to shut off API access to my language learning site - jbaudanza
For the last two years, I&#x27;ve been working as an indie developer on a language learning app called www.captionpop.com. This project uses the YouTube API to help language learners study foreign languages. It&#x27;s gotten pretty popular, especially with English learners.<p>The primary feature of CaptionPop is that it allows users to watch YouTube videos with multiple subtitle languages at once. It also allows users to bookmark subtitles, and create study flashcards from video snippets.<p>YouTube has been doing an audit of my use of the YouTube API for the last couple of months. Right now, they are saying that I am violating their terms of service by interfering with the functionality of the YouTube embedded player.<p>The following lines in the ToS were citing in my violation:<p>Policy #: III.F.1.a (YouTube Look and Feel)
API Client must not change or interfere with user interfaces in YouTube Applications unless you have obtained YouTube&#x27;s prior written approval<p>Policy #:: III.I.6 (Additional Prohibitions)
API client should not modify, build upon, or block any portion or functionality of a YouTube player.
https:&#x2F;&#x2F;developers.google.com&#x2F;youtube&#x2F;terms&#x2F;developer-policies<p>My position is that I&#x27;m using the IFRAME API as it was intended. I cited the IFRAME API reference and a IFRAME API demo that would seem to imply that this type of functionality is encouraged
https:&#x2F;&#x2F;developers.google.com&#x2F;youtube&#x2F;iframe_api_reference
https:&#x2F;&#x2F;developers.google.com&#x2F;youtube&#x2F;youtube_player_demo<p>They don&#x27;t seem willing to budge, and are threatening to turn off my API access in a couple of days.<p>I am posting to HN to seek advice on the best way to proceed with this situation. Also, if there is anybody at YouTube that could help me out, I would greatly appreciate it.<p>It would be a shame if I had to shutdown CaptionPop. It has helped a lot of people with their language learning journey and I believe it is a positive contribution to the YouTube ecosystem. Any advice appreciated!
======
masukomi
i think you're absolutely in violation of

> Policy #: III.F.1.a (YouTube Look and Feel) API Client must not change or
> interfere with user interfaces in YouTube Applications unless you have
> obtained YouTube's prior written approval

assuming you haven't previously acquired written approval. Have you tried
doing that?

You're also definitely modifying and building up a portion of functionality of
the player

Ultimately, i think you're kinda screwed. You're unlikely to get into contact
with someone with the power to make decisions / exceptions.

BUT there is another option. It doesn't have to be a site. Could you do it
using the normal non-api tools available to end users browsing youtube. In
other words, could you make it a browser plugin that they couldn't complain
about?

\--- as an aside, this seems a pretty clear violation of the intent of their
terms of service. it sounds like you're trying to rules lawyer them into
ignoring their own rules. Imagine the tables were turned and your product had
an API someone was using. They're clearly violating the intent of your terms
of service, but they're trying to argue with you that "technically I'm not"
would you really be inclined to let them off because you hadn't gotten
explicit enough in your TOS? Even if you did, the _next_ iteration of your
terms of service WOULD be explicit enough and then you _would_ boot them.

I agree that what you're doing is probably a good thing, and that it's silly
for YT to be trying to kill it. I agree that they _should_ let it slide, but
at the same time, it _is_ a clear violation, and not one of the many cases of
them being random A-Holes and applying completely inapplicable rules to get
rid of someone.

~~~
jbaudanza
That is definitely a reasonable interpretation. But I think if I'm violating
their ToS, then almost every non-trivial use of the IFRAME API is violating
their API. Google is a big company, and I think it's likely that the IFRAME
API team and the legal team were just not in sync on this.

I am definitely not trying to imply that anyone is being a "random a-hole",
I'm just hoping I can find a way to appeal to a sympathetic project manager or
decision maker at YT that can see the value in this project.

Thanks for your input!

