If rolled out widely, this would make web browsers and third-party YouTube clients without a DRM license unusable for YouTube playback, download, etc. This would include almost all open-source web browsers and almost all third-party YouTube clients. Archive link to reddit post about this
How to kill YouTube in one stupid step.
I guess their CEO wasn’t paying attention when the music industry got trounced by pirating.
Why would it kill YouTube?
Spotify has DRM for all of their songs, it has not killed music streaming.
What this actually does is make it formally illegal to rip YouTube videos (circumventing DRM is against DMCA). It’s also a shot against youtube-dlp, which refuses to cross the line of cracking the DRM, which would be doable, but they don’t want to on account of the legal issue.
How exactly will this kill YouTube? This will only kill ad blockers.
Nah, maybe some people will switch ad blockers off, but for most, the msin takeaway will be to look for a competing service.
You vastly overestimate people’s tech savviness.
And you vastly underestimate the value Youtube would lose if the tech-savvy segment of their audience went elsewhere.
Those left behind are a different market. Youtube creators would have to dumb themselves down even further, driving even more worthwhile content off the service. Soon Youtube would be the Facebook of video sites, geared towards a shrinking population of people too old and stubborn to move on.
I say YT should absolutely shoot themselves in the foot like this.
What competing service
Other entertainment. If Youtube makes my head hurt, I’ll go touch grass, watch a movie, read some news, play boardgames, etc.
And if one can’t get out of their phone, then there is Tiktok I guess.
If they were to force a TEE based DRM like Widevine L1, it would likely cause significant issues as there are a considerable amount of devices that don’t support it (for example most PCs).
If they were to use software based DRM like Widevine L3, it would be easy for enthusiasts to crack and the tools for doing so would just get much much better.
Probably not going to kill it, but the number of users and view counts will drop dramatically. The idea is, that it cuts all deadweight users, which reduces Google’s expenses.
Everyone who is allergic to ads, will leave and find their video entertainment elsewhere. As far as those users are concerned, YT will be dead to them.
Those who remain, will either pay up, or have ads shoved down their throats. Line goes up, and shareholders are happy. The money must flow.
As the enshittification of YT has marched towards its terminal stage, many youtubers have already prepared for it by migrating their videos to other platforms. YT doesn’t like tits, so those videos had to go to Onlyfans, Justforfans or whatever. YT doesn’t like guns, so those videos went to Pepperbox. YT doesn’t like providing a steady income to anyone, so many videos went to Nebula. Then there’s also palces like Floatplane, Locals, Playeur etc. I’m sure there are lots of other video platforms too. The way I see it, YT can die, and the fragmented video landscape will only thrive as a result.
Sure, but I still think yall are really overestimating how many people will actually care. You might need to reevaluate your bias. The average person will definitely not change apps or websites. Maybe 1% of users will care to find an alternative for their video needs. And even then, some videos are only on YouTube.
Oh, but here’s the thing. YT is already abusing the people who make the videos. Many of them are already using YT as a platform for promoting their real video platform. They will only upload advertisers friendly watered down versions and mention at the end that if you want to see the real one, head over to one of the countless other platforms they’ve built over the years. All of that is already happening, and it can become a significant factor in the future.
Will it though? Who knows. ¯\_(ツ)_/¯
If it does, it means that more and more people will migrate to the real video platforms where they can watch the uncut version of every video. I think there’s real potential to shift the video consumption culture from one ad supported platform that abuses everyone involved to several paid platforms, that treat everyone much better.
Youtubers have complained about YT being a horrible landlord for so many years, and yet they can’t leave. They keep trying, but very few succeeded. It’s a shitty situation, but that’s where the audience and the money are.
But now the more edgy videos are gone and the watch time that is attached to them. If you want to watch something that is too spicy for YT, you have to do so somewhere else. The fragmentation has already started.
It won’t kill adblockers, because adblockers don’t circumvent DRM.
DRM in the video feed would allow encrypted ads in the videos, and effectively break normal ad blockers.
Only if there was no client-side decoration/measurement code/links etc to denote that an ad is playing, which there will always be.
It’s basically no different from having in-stream ads today.
It’s very different. It’s not as trivial as you paint it. They can make it as hard as they want to detect.
I’m not making it out to be trivial, but I am realistic about the matter.
You can have in-stream ads to make things ‘unblockable’, but only so long as there’s no other side effects. Any side effects can be detected, that’s really just the reality of the matter.
They went and paid for Spotify.
Like most heavy users of YTP. YouTube will be just fine. Y’all just freeloaders. Pay you cheap bastards.
Already paid in personal data before I was smart enough to try and close the faucet, I don’t see why I should pay more
Because prices change. You can stop using it if you don’t feel the value is there.
Alright, so is my current data worth more or less than my old data? Is my old data worth more or less today than, say, 3 years ago? I don’t see a reason to pay if Google refuses to let people know how much they are worth to them, first.
YouTube was acting a loss leader for years.
Your data has increased in value since then, so has the cost to run the service. These things aren’t some mutually exclusive bubble. This is not how businesses are run, certainly not public traded companies. Many consumers do find the value in a $22/mo video + music sub. We use it a lot.
I have no expectations of a free experience and I get nearly all my families entertainment media via a single subscription. If they raise it beyond my expectations I will steal it or look elsewhere depending on the quality of the content at that time.
But for now, it’s a fantastic service.
Jesus christ. You might wanna come up for air, dude
👌
I’d happily pay if youtube stopped falsley demonitizing all the creators I watch. I refuse to give money to copyright trolls. If I pay youtube then youtube just hands a portion of that money to copyright trolls, no questions asked.