Death to embedded video! January 21, 2005 7:59 AM Subscribe
Proposed: if the purpose of your MeFi post is 'watch this cool video', then please try to include a direct link to that video as well as a link to the HTML web site. Death to embedded video!
Agreed. I think this is a bad proposal. Someone is paying to host that video- do them the courtesy of linking to it the way they intend.
posted by mkultra at 8:35 AM on January 21, 2005
posted by mkultra at 8:35 AM on January 21, 2005
Easily addressed. "Hey, watch this cool video [direct link] brought to you by the ever-creative minds at [some website]!"
While we're at it, Coral cache links are nice for those big files on questionable servers.
posted by Galvatron at 8:38 AM on January 21, 2005
While we're at it, Coral cache links are nice for those big files on questionable servers.
posted by Galvatron at 8:38 AM on January 21, 2005
Easily addressed. "Hey, watch this cool video [direct link] brought to you by the ever-creative minds at [some website]!"
Should we also include any advertising on the page that the user might be using to supplement bandwidth costs? We could put banner adds right in the FPP.
posted by eyeballkid at 9:15 AM on January 21, 2005
Should we also include any advertising on the page that the user might be using to supplement bandwidth costs? We could put banner adds right in the FPP.
posted by eyeballkid at 9:15 AM on January 21, 2005
We could put banner adds right in the FPP.
Hell, there must be some reason Matt hasn't banned the img tag yet. That must be it!
posted by Galvatron at 9:30 AM on January 21, 2005
Hell, there must be some reason Matt hasn't banned the img tag yet. That must be it!
posted by Galvatron at 9:30 AM on January 21, 2005
mkultra and mendel make sense. Also, videos the owner has not intended to be linked directly to will move = link rot.
ps - what if they don't even have banners? Could you just do them courtesy of showing it within their page as they intended?
posted by dabitch at 10:17 AM on January 21, 2005
ps - what if they don't even have banners? Could you just do them courtesy of showing it within their page as they intended?
posted by dabitch at 10:17 AM on January 21, 2005
All I'm asking is that I have both options. Link to the proper site, link also to the video.
I understand site owners feel like they need to add value (or extract value) by putting a bunch of stuff around the video, but I don't want to see it. And I really don't want to watch someone's 200x150 video on my 1600x1200 display without the ability to zoom it.
Great idea to use some automated caching on the link.
posted by Nelson at 10:25 AM on January 21, 2005
I understand site owners feel like they need to add value (or extract value) by putting a bunch of stuff around the video, but I don't want to see it. And I really don't want to watch someone's 200x150 video on my 1600x1200 display without the ability to zoom it.
Great idea to use some automated caching on the link.
posted by Nelson at 10:25 AM on January 21, 2005
Life is so tough...
posted by SweetJesus at 10:33 AM on January 21, 2005
posted by SweetJesus at 10:33 AM on January 21, 2005
I understand site owners feel like they need to add value (or extract value) by putting a bunch of stuff around the video, but I don't want to see it. And I really don't want to watch someone's 200x150 video on my 1600x1200 display without the ability to zoom it.
With all due respect, Nelson, tough titties. I'm happy for your kewl monitor and all, but that doesn't make you entitled to see a video the way you want. Someone took the time and resources to make something available to you, almost always for free. Show that person some respect in kind.
posted by mkultra at 10:37 AM on January 21, 2005
With all due respect, Nelson, tough titties. I'm happy for your kewl monitor and all, but that doesn't make you entitled to see a video the way you want. Someone took the time and resources to make something available to you, almost always for free. Show that person some respect in kind.
posted by mkultra at 10:37 AM on January 21, 2005
Frankly, I don't know how to provide a useable direct link to a video clip that's embedded in someone else's page. I don't see why I should have to figure it out just because you don't like the way the information was presented to you. If you really want to watch the video in all your resolutionary zeal, then you can go in and figure it out once you've clicked the link.
As for the bypassing the added value, whether it is advertising (which pays for the bandwidth you're going to suck down) or contextual information, the clip was embedded for a reason by the person who put it on the web. It seems respectful to respect that.
posted by jacquilynne at 10:54 AM on January 21, 2005
As for the bypassing the added value, whether it is advertising (which pays for the bandwidth you're going to suck down) or contextual information, the clip was embedded for a reason by the person who put it on the web. It seems respectful to respect that.
posted by jacquilynne at 10:54 AM on January 21, 2005
This is a sticky wicket. In some cases, like advertising, it's valid.
In other cases it's just the host/owner being thick, like with those useless right-click traps to 'protect' images, when there are numerous and easy ways around it. Like hitting the spacebar while holding the right-click. Or screen caps.
Personally, if I like the video, I'll try to unwrap it or find a direct link to save it to disk, or open it in a friendlier player like Real Alternative or VLC or whatnot.
But it's probably a bad precedent to set to require posters to find the direct link. AFAIK I don't think there's anything legally wrong with direct/deep linking, but leave it to the poster and/or viewer to decide if it's worth finding a direct link.
posted by loquacious at 11:20 AM on January 21, 2005
In other cases it's just the host/owner being thick, like with those useless right-click traps to 'protect' images, when there are numerous and easy ways around it. Like hitting the spacebar while holding the right-click. Or screen caps.
Personally, if I like the video, I'll try to unwrap it or find a direct link to save it to disk, or open it in a friendlier player like Real Alternative or VLC or whatnot.
But it's probably a bad precedent to set to require posters to find the direct link. AFAIK I don't think there's anything legally wrong with direct/deep linking, but leave it to the poster and/or viewer to decide if it's worth finding a direct link.
posted by loquacious at 11:20 AM on January 21, 2005
Might be OK in a comment, but if we're going to rape someone's bandwith by linking a site here the least we can do is not do the equivalent of an inline image theft on their video.
posted by Space Coyote at 2:06 PM on January 21, 2005
posted by Space Coyote at 2:06 PM on January 21, 2005
This is a good point of courtesy, and one I hadn't really thought about before. I shall certainly abide by your suggestion. Thanks for bringing this up.
posted by frykitty at 2:31 PM on January 21, 2005
posted by frykitty at 2:31 PM on January 21, 2005
Wanna hear something funny? A Danish court ruled deeplinking illegal, so it all depends on where the server is. ;)
The Danish case was about - get this - linking to newsstories rather than the front page of the newspaper. Nuts.
posted by dabitch at 4:53 AM on January 22, 2005
The Danish case was about - get this - linking to newsstories rather than the front page of the newspaper. Nuts.
posted by dabitch at 4:53 AM on January 22, 2005
Hm. I wonder if that hurt or helped their domestic web hosting industry?
posted by scarabic at 9:21 AM on January 22, 2005
posted by scarabic at 9:21 AM on January 22, 2005
I actually have a problem viewing most embedded quicktime (browser problem), so I do find them frustrating. But I also understand the desire not to deeplink, re bandwidth, ads, etc. Perhaps if those offended could provide a mirror?
posted by jb at 7:52 PM on January 22, 2005
posted by jb at 7:52 PM on January 22, 2005
I'll bet most people around these parts just aren't saavy enough to figure out how to get to the direct link in some of the more obscure files.
And embedded Windows Media crashes my Firefox most of the time, while embedded Quicktime crashes it half the time. So I hate embedded video, and will do all that I can to quash it.
In other words, Nelson, I'll keep fighting the good fight with ya'.
posted by Civil_Disobedient at 8:27 AM on January 23, 2005
And embedded Windows Media crashes my Firefox most of the time, while embedded Quicktime crashes it half the time. So I hate embedded video, and will do all that I can to quash it.
In other words, Nelson, I'll keep fighting the good fight with ya'.
posted by Civil_Disobedient at 8:27 AM on January 23, 2005
Might be OK in a comment
That's a very, very good idea.
posted by Civil_Disobedient at 8:28 AM on January 23, 2005
That's a very, very good idea.
posted by Civil_Disobedient at 8:28 AM on January 23, 2005
Embedded videos crash your browsers? I've never experienced anything of the sort, are your browsers setups broken somehow? Though my Safari plays nicer with embedded windows media than my Firefox, so I must say stating what kind of video it is in the FPP is good form and much appreciated by the likes of me.
posted by dabitch at 7:22 AM on January 24, 2005
posted by dabitch at 7:22 AM on January 24, 2005
You are not logged in, either login or create an account to post comments
posted by mendel at 8:25 AM on January 21, 2005