To be fair it would be more HN worthy if they managed to reverse engineer the DRM of Spotify to create a custom client without the Spotify library (which only works for Premium users)
Would be far less worthy if, by the time we get to the README, we only get to see a take down notice from Github. Instigated by Spotify for breach of not sure what.
One of their terms of use is regarding using their API data alongside competitor services. This project fundamentally breaks that. I think it's on borrowed time.
> Would be far less worthy if, by the time we get to the README, we only get to see a take down notice from Github. Instigated by Spotify for breach of not sure what.
Circumventing DRM, no matter how trivial, is a violation of the DMCA.
> Would be far less worthy if, by the time we get to the README, we only get to see a take down notice from Github. Instigated by Spotify for breach of not sure what.
was what violation would cause Github specifically to take it down, not whether it could ever find a host. The parent brought up Github, not I.
I picked Github simply because Spotube happen to have been pushed there.
And because Github is by far the most popular platform to host projects that gets discovered.
And because they've taken down many projects in the past, blocking broadwide access not just from jurisdictions where not sure what non ethical law makes not certain what illegal.
Yeah, no shade to you from me. I think my mention of a US law triggered some HNers' (justified) fears of US-centrism, and I was just explaining why I thought it was not unduly US-centric to respond to a comment about a company headquartered in the US with a remark that referenced the DMCA.
Your sibling comment https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=39073132 mentioned a similar thing. The reference to Github and what could cause a takedown there was the parent's, not mine.
