ePub gets (yet) another DRM system

[pwalker8]

Originally Posted by Apache

So no one after 1860 had nothing important to say and did not write "real books"?
Not to mention that authors used to be paid by the word and would pad their books to increase their payments.
Apache

A number of the old classics were edited down in their modern popular book form from the original serialized form, both to get rid of the fluff as well as to get rid of the repeated information that one needs so those who missed an installment won't be left out.

Dumas was reported to have a team of ghostwriters to flesh out his novels in part to maximize his revenue by expanding the number of words.

[underscore]

Italian library network want to implement Readium LCP instead of ADE within end of 2021.

[binaryhermit]

So, did this actually get implemented yet by anyone?

[MyDK]

Yes, it did. Status in 2019: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=bTTghlQtDvc

https://www.edrlab.org/readium-lcp/

[JSWolf]

What's with the mangled Youtube URL?

[cromag]

If you click on "Share" under the video that's the URL they give you to copy. I don't know if there's a functional difference -- clicking on it opens the video and it looks the same to me.

[Uncle Robin]

Originally Posted by cromag

If you click on "Share" under the video that's the URL they give you to copy. I don't know if there's a functional difference -- clicking on it opens the video and it looks the same to me.

Yep, that's just YT's own link shortener "youtu.be"

[DiapDealer]

Originally Posted by Uncle Robin

Yep, that's just YT's own link shortener "youtu.be"

And Section 8 of the Mobileread guidelines (Links, Uploads, Copyright and DRM) indicates that url shortening services are not to be used. Youtube's shortening service is at least still fairly recognizable, but the idea is that people want to see exactly where they're headed before they click on links in posts. Many url-shortening services make this impossible.

There's no need to shorten urls here. If urls become long and unwieldy, just turn the post's text into links. That way, those who want to know where they're going can still see the unshortened link if they want, while still keeping your post aesthetically pleasing.

Moderator Notice
The shortened link in the post in question has been removed in favor of the unshortened one.

[Uncle Robin]

Originally Posted by DiapDealer

And Section 8 of the Mobileread guidelines (Links, Uploads, Copyright and DRM) indicates that url shortening services are not to be used. Youtube's shortening service is at least still fairly recognizable, but the idea is that people want to see exactly where they're headed before they click on links in posts. Many url-shortening services make this impossible.

There's no need to shorten urls here. If urls become long and unwieldy, just turn the post's text into links. That way, those who want to know where they're going can still see the unshortened link if they want, while still keeping your post aesthetically pleasing.


The shortened link in the post in question has been removed in favor of the unshortened one.

To be fair to the OP, YouTube defaults to giving its own shortened link with no user input required. Click on the "share" icon and the link offered is the shortened one. Many who copy a YT link may not even realize it has been shortened, especially because the word "youtube" still appears to be there.

[DiapDealer]

Precisely why I commented with no warnings about punishment.

But as like with oversized images, members are still ultimately responsible for what they post here. No matter where they might copy it from.

[JSWolf]

If you are going to be posting a YouTube URL, if the thread page doesn't have too many videos posted, it's best to embed the YouTube video in the post. You may need to go to advanced mode to do this.

If anyone needs to see how to embed a YouTube video, this is the same video as linked above in the this thread. Just quote this post and you'll see the code.

[DiapDealer]

Originally Posted by JSWolf

it's best to embed the YouTube video in the post. You may need to go to advanced mode to do this.

"Best" is subjective. It's certainly within the rules, but I dislike the practice myself. Just like I dislike linked images. Eventually you're left with barely intelligible conversations littered with broken embedded videos and image links.

[John F]

Originally Posted by DiapDealer

"Best" is subjective. It's certainly within the rules, but I dislike the practice myself. Just like I dislike linked images. Eventually you're left with barely intelligible conversations littered with broken embedded videos and image links.

Plus long load times on slower devices.

[DNSB]

Originally Posted by DiapDealer

"Best" is subjective. It's certainly within the rules, but I dislike the practice myself. Just like I dislike linked images. Eventually you're left with barely intelligible conversations littered with broken embedded videos and image links.

Originally Posted by John F

Plus long load times on slower devices.

The load times are why I sometimes prefer to have Youtube links wrapped in spoiler tags.

[JSWolf]

Originally Posted by DiapDealer

"Best" is subjective. It's certainly within the rules, but I dislike the practice myself. Just like I dislike linked images. Eventually you're left with barely intelligible conversations littered with broken embedded videos and image links.

Yes, you could broken embedded videos. But you can also end up with broken YouTube links that you don't know is broken until you click the link. At least when the embedded video, you know it's gone without the need to click.

As for the images, I agree that they can be annoying when broken. They can also be annoying depending where they link. I don't like when they link to most image hosting sites.