He's not using the API, he's just downloading videos as any user would and feeding the videos to ffmpeg to produce mp3's.
It's alway been possible to download YouTube videos. They use progressive download, not ("encrypted") streaming a la Adobe.[1] And they used to use ffmpeg internally as well. Not sure if they still do.
The only explanation I can think for Google's strange response to this is that they are under pressure from the RIAA. The RIAA may not like this particular site for some reason. There are certainly others like it.
1. There is a common myth that YouTube uses "streaming" and that Adobe flash player is needed to watch YouTube videos. The RIAA is probably among those who believe this. It is simply false. I've never had a working Flash player since I don't use Windows or Linux and I've been watching YouTube videos since the beginning. Not to mention videos from various other sites that tell users they need to install Adobe flash player (and open themselves up to flash cookies).
If the RIAA was really serious about stopping people from listening to music via YouTube, they would do better by going after Google. Though I think we all, including the RIAA and its members, know they can't win that battle. The courts ar are on Google's side. And fingerpinting and DMCA notices just won't cut it.
So this guy is really just a pawn in the game. Google can "negotiate" with the RIAA, while this guy cannot.
It's alway been possible to download YouTube videos. They use progressive download, not ("encrypted") streaming a la Adobe.[1] And they used to use ffmpeg internally as well. Not sure if they still do.
The only explanation I can think for Google's strange response to this is that they are under pressure from the RIAA. The RIAA may not like this particular site for some reason. There are certainly others like it.
1. There is a common myth that YouTube uses "streaming" and that Adobe flash player is needed to watch YouTube videos. The RIAA is probably among those who believe this. It is simply false. I've never had a working Flash player since I don't use Windows or Linux and I've been watching YouTube videos since the beginning. Not to mention videos from various other sites that tell users they need to install Adobe flash player (and open themselves up to flash cookies).
If the RIAA was really serious about stopping people from listening to music via YouTube, they would do better by going after Google. Though I think we all, including the RIAA and its members, know they can't win that battle. The courts ar are on Google's side. And fingerpinting and DMCA notices just won't cut it.
So this guy is really just a pawn in the game. Google can "negotiate" with the RIAA, while this guy cannot.