The part where the content creator doesn't get paid and is supposed to according to the rules of the platform is the part where it's piracy.
communist
joined 4 months ago
If they could they would do that, they just can't stop you.
They're trying desperately these days, it's just a hard problem.
No, i'm explicitly not, those aren't tracked and nobody gets paid based on whether or not you fastforward. That makes it not piracy. The content creator gets paid.
Make sure to go for an immutable distro with kde if you're a windows user, you'll never have to do any maintenance, I highly recommend fedora kinoite
...except that's violating youtubes terms of service, and skipping paying the content creators.
Which makes it for all intents and purposes piracy.
You're not violating their terms of service by doing that.
So what if it has to be split into degrees? The world is a complex place and wishing it was simple doesn't make it so.
There’s no external program, it’s just an extension on my browser
That's... external software. But even if it wasn't, it's still circumventing the youtube terms of service with software.
You're breaking the terms of service of youtube by doing this... that makes it piracy...
No because the content creator got paid for the ad.
If it's funded by live ads and the ads fund the creators, then skipping the ads means skipping your payment.
It's not legally piracy, but it's the same spirit and the effects are indistinguishable on the creators.
I don't see how your example is even vaguely similar to mine, and the fact that you used that as an example means you don't understand my argument.
Of course it does, the part where the content creator doesn't get paid and is supposed to according to the rules of the platform is the part where it's piracy.