Quote:
Originally Posted by JSWolf
From that blog post we get...
B&N is not adopting the cross-platform solution as their platform is the only one that handles this new DRM. B&N should be using the current ePub DRM standard until CS5 and the SDK was available for other companies to take advantage of. Then that statement would be true.
|
Bill also wrote in that blog post:
Quote:
|
And, by adding support for password-based content protection for EPUB, Adobe is addressing the need to deliver a more lenient "social DRM" option as part of our solution.
|
It seems as if
kennyc ist right and B&N was something like a "development partner" for the new DRM.
Anyway, i agree with you, that Adobe (or everyone who uses their DRM) should at least use other file extensions than "epub". But again, not the nook is "responsible" for that situation.
Quote:
Originally Posted by JSWolf
So you see, because B&N's samples are DRM free (doesn't say so) and the full eBook is with the new DRM (doesn't say so), this ePub was purchased and now B&N will not refund the money when clearly it is B&N's fault.
|
I missed that post by
sunbird. Thanks for pointing it out. Day by day we are hearing about similiar cases when people bought epubs (the free samples worked fine for them too) and the reading device (eg. our sony prs-505) is not able to render the bought file because of the 400k limitation in the mobile reader sdk. Where is the difference? They bought an ePub which can't be used on their device. Different causes, same problem.
Again: Why is it the nooks fault that B&N offers content which isn't useable on other devices?
Btw. a lot of ePubs from other providers than B&N are not useable on the nook at the moment, which is a much more serious issue imho. (see the topic "Loading failures" in Liza's review:
http://blog.threepress.org/2009/12/1...nderer-review/)
We are already talking about return policies and the responsibility of content providers for their offered content, which is different from what you wrote in the thread title.