[kzrdude]

I don't see how it can be a copyright problem to allow people to save it privately. Especially since every copy is deliberate, i.e user chosen to save that particular page.

[sourcecodeplz]

It can be. Providing the tool to do something illegal, with the sole purpose of the tool being to do something illegal, is illegal. Check out the YouTube DL project history/controversy.

[vorpalhex]

You are incorrect.

Youtube-dl had a takedown because they specifically ran a circumvention in their tests. They removed the test and were restored.

Youtube-dl is still freely available.

Saving web pages is not illegal nor prohibited.

[mthoms]

Making personal copies of articles you read is certainly covered by fair use. Just as photocopies and vcr recordings are.

YouTube DL was alleged to be bypassing copyright protections which doesn’t apply to media without any protections like public web pages.

And in any case, it seems the software was reinstated by GitHub after The EFF intervened.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Youtube-dl

[k_]

Browsers provide the tool to save those pages (ctrl+s), in what way is it different? Honest question, as I'm building something that could be impacted.

[TedDoesntTalk]

OP probably thinks taking a photo of the Mona Lisa for personal use is also a copyright violation.