On Sun, 2006-05-21 at 22:41 +0200, Benoit Chesneau wrote:
> I was browsing the web to see some net art performances
and video
> websites (google video, yourtubes...) and most of them
use flash
> today. Advantage of flash is that it is on most of
desktop (lix x86,
> windows & mac) so that's why I think it is
choosed.
Google video allows download in other formats, at least some
of which
are playable on Linux with vlc or mplayer.
But I don't think Flash was chosen due to players existing
for all the
major platforms (the Linux player is not up to date anyway).
Rather I
suspect it was chosen by many of these services due to being
deployed on
something like 98% of web browsers, which no other format
can match, and
because it is very lightweight.
I'm no fan of Flash but I have to admit it does video
really well.
I'm no fan of sites that make it hard to download media
either, but
there are workarounds, see
http://1024k.de/bookmarklets/video-bookmarklets.html
> But could we have a commons license with a flash
product (movie,
> multimedia experience..). I mean we can't reuse a
flash object without
> the source. Is there any possibility to do it ? How to
replace flash?
There's no requirement to publish the source, and source is
not
particularly well defined for non-software stuff. In any
case if the
licensor wants to they can publish their .fla files in the
case of a
Flash project and high quality versions of whatever media
were used in
creating a video (e.g., wav files for audio, etc).
--
http://wiki.creativecommons.org/User:Mike_Linksvayer
_______________________________________________
cc-community mailing list
cc-community lists.ibiblio.org
http://lists.ibiblio.org/mailman/listinfo/cc-community
|