[Bug] Remove Jamendo

[TimidRobot]

Description

Jamendo no longer supports searching by license.

Reproduction

1. Type a word
2. Click Jamendo
3. Always get the same invalid search result: https://www.jamendo.com/search?q=fq

Expectation

Search engines should return meaningful results (CC licensed works). As Jamendo no longer supports CC licensed content in their search, it should be removed.

[dikehprosper]

I’m currently working on this

[possumbilities]

@dikehprosper You've got several contributions, and are already working on at least another issue, I'd suggest you leave this one for some one else to contribute to for now ❤️

[dullbenz]

@TimidRobot @possumbilities
After doing some research on Jamendo, they still offer licensed content for commercial reuse, it's just the way they offer the content that has changed.

So as it stands, the old Jamendo contains music that can be modified, downloaded, and reused (Personal use).

And the site licensing.jamendo contains music that can be used for commercial purposes and played in public places.

So, we just need to redirect to one of the two sites based on the filters the user has applied. So for example, if the user checked the "use for commercial purposes" checkbox, we redirect to licensing.jamendo else we redirect to old Jamendo

[dullbenz]

Also, the search returns the "invalid search result: https://www.jamendo.com/search?q=fq" because of the malformed search query.

The malformed query may be due to the fact that the Jamendo site may have been updated and their search query format updated as well, implying that we may need to update ours in return so as to get expected results.

[Rubadel]

I will work on this issue, please could you assign me @TimidRobot @possumbilities

[Rubadel]

I just finish of this issue, and I sent PR @TimidRobot

[ImaJin14]

I just finish of this issue, and I sent PR @TimidRobot

You need to open up a PR for that commit to be reviewed and merged:)

[Rubadel]

@ImaJin14 Yes, I sent PR from my environment after done of the work.. Is it wrong? or there is another way required?

[possumbilities]

I think it warrants shifting this into seeing if Jamendo can be changed to reflect correct results rather than removing it based on what @dullbenz has outlined above.

@TimidRobot Do you have an opinion opposing that? Anyone else?

[Rubadel]

Ok, I am Just excited to do something to contribute ..

[ImaJin14]

@ImaJin14 Yes, I sent PR from my environment after done of the work.. Is it wrong? or there is another way required?

You have no active PR on this issue but rather a commit....

[Rubadel]

Ok how can I make active PR on this issue?

[ImaJin14]

I think it warrants shifting this into seeing if Jamendo can be changed to reflect correct results rather than removing it based on what @dullbenz has outlined above.

@TimidRobot Do you have an opinion opposing that? Anyone else?

I think it's better to see if jamendo can be fixed to return meaningful information rather than discarding the engine....

[possumbilities]

@Rubadel do you want to make a PR to see if its possible to fix the engine?

[Rubadel]

@possumbilities Yes I want

[ImaJin14]

Ok how can I make active PR on this issue?

See https://docs.github.com/en/pull-requests

[ImaJin14]

@possumbilities Yes I want

Meaning you will have to delete your last commit in which you removed the search engine...

[Rubadel]

@possumbilities I sent RP could you review

[SilasEze]

i would like to contribute to this project
Could you assign me @TimidRobot @possumbilities

[possumbilities]

@SilasEze HI! Glad you're interested in contributing, but it seems someone is already working on it, and has already submitted a PR. I'd suggest you try to offer contributions via feedback here or to the PR, or find another Issue to contribute to that's available, or find and generate new Issues. :)

[xolotl]

Related: Openverse has been discussing a possible lack of clarity in Jamendo licensing practices.

[heyakyra]

Also, the search returns the "invalid search result: https://www.jamendo.com/search?q=fq" because of the malformed search query.

The malformed query may be due to the fact that the Jamendo site may have been updated and their search query format updated as well, implying that we may need to update ours in return so as to get expected results.

The current state is broken still, and results in queries like so, where the search terms become [query-nc] [-nd] instead of [query] [-nc] [-nd]:

And either way, the filters for removing noncommercial and non-derivative licensed results don't work.

So as it stands, the old Jamendo contains music that can be modified, downloaded, and reused (Personal use).

And the site licensing.jamendo contains music that can be used for commercial purposes and played in public places.

[…] So for example, if the user checked the "use for commercial purposes" checkbox, we redirect to licensing.jamendo else we redirect to old Jamendo

This is incorrect, and therefore the solution implemented in #137 is backwards. Jamendo has adopted the language of the music industry oligopoly: "can be used commercially" actually means you can't use it commercially until you buy a license. "can be used personally" means you can use it personally (and maybe commercially too, but it's not in our financial interest to inform you)

[possumbilities]

@heyakyra this is incredibly helpful, thanks for noticing it! ❤️. I've made a new Issue from your comment, since this one was already closed previously:

• [bug] Reconsider inclusion/function of Jamendo, terms and filtering are misaligned #216

If there's further details you'd like to add there, please feel free to do so.