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.
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.
The following lines in the ToS were citing in my violation:
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
Policy #:: III.I.6 (Additional Prohibitions) API client should not modify, build upon, or block any portion or functionality of a YouTube player. https://developers.google.com/youtube/terms/developer-policies
My position is that I'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://developers.google.com/youtube/iframe_api_reference https://developers.google.com/youtube/youtube_player_demo
They don't seem willing to budge, and are threatening to turn off my API access in a couple of days.
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.
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!
> 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.