Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

Update on HTML5 Video for Netflix

techblog.netflix.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

121–130 of 524 posts

Re: Update on HTML5 Video for Netflix

#121

Post by tptacek »

shmerl wrote: post #114
tptacek wrote: post #113

Earlier quoted context omitted.

What the hell is Gog? Serious question. It was obviously never going to be my contention that there were no DRM-free video content producers. Just the major ones.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/GOG.com (the article incorrectly calls it Cypriot company, it's Polish). And I meant major ones. They admit that DRM isn't needed. See the report in the link above. Their usage of DRM isn't caused by business enabling requirements, but has completely crooked unrelated reasons.

So basically every mainstream movie and television content producer is colluding with every other such producer for some crooked end? By revenue, the overwhelming majority of the media industry is a criminal conspiracy?

Re: Update on HTML5 Video for Netflix

#122

Post by hsivonen »

tzs wrote: post #94
Touche wrote: post #59

Earlier quoted context omitted.

There are no use cases for EME other than DRM.

How about sharing encrypted videos among a private group of people who are not technologically sophisticated? The conventional way to do so would require recipients to download an encrypted video file, then run a separate program to decrypt the file. Then they could play the file. Then they have to remember to delete the decrypted file if it is something sensitive that should not be lying about unencrypted on their s…

If you mean using EME just for non-DRM encryption, no it doesn't make sense: https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=11692420

If you mean that the recipients of the video are restricted in what they can do with it, that's a DRM use case.

Re: Update on HTML5 Video for Netflix

#123

Post by shmerl »

tptacek wrote: post #121
shmerl wrote: post #114

Earlier quoted context omitted.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/GOG.com (the article incorrectly calls it Cypriot company, it's Polish). And I meant major ones. They admit that DRM isn't needed. See the report in the link above. Their usage of DRM isn't caused by business enabling requirements, but has completely crooked unrelated reasons.

So basically every mainstream movie and television content producer is colluding with every other such producer for some crooked end? By revenue, the overwhelming majority of the media industry is a criminal conspiracy?

Basically, every major film studio (or rather film publisher) is insisting on DRM when making distribution deals, for completely crooked reasons, yes.

Re: Update on HTML5 Video for Netflix

#124

Post by Touche »

tptacek wrote: post #100
Touche wrote: post #57

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Meaning anyone can implement the technology that can show a web page. You can't show Netflix's web page, unless they preapprove of your DRM.

And that's different from a web page that won't allow you to access it without a password, how? In both cases, a business decision by a third party limits what you're able to access. I understand that you don't want to run code Netflix approves of and that you're not permitted to read in its original source form. And that's fine, a good reason not to subscribe to Netflix. But how is that any more an offense to "the o…

> And that's different from a web page that won't allow you to access it without a password, how?

It works the same regardless of what browser or OS you are using.

Re: Update on HTML5 Video for Netflix

#125

Post by Touche »

tptacek wrote: post #101
josteink wrote: post #55

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> Netflix wouldn't be a viable business if not for DRM. Why is everyone so upset? Having the option to use DRM in native web APIs is not a bad thing. Because Netflix is freeloading on our open technology to deliver closed content, and putting the cost to support their DRM on us. It's not right. It's not fair. They are fragmenting the web by making "web sites" which are browser and OS-specific. If they want to make cl…

In what sense is Netflix "freeloading"? Where does the free ride stop? Are they allowed to use TCP/IP stacks to deliver DRM? The HTTP protocol? Or is just Mozilla that's the problem?

The free ride stops when they add stuff to a spec that other people can't freely implement.

Re: Update on HTML5 Video for Netflix

#126

Post by nikcub »

scythe wrote: post #86
cyborgx7 wrote: post #2

Translation: Netflix successfully lobied DRM into what is supposed to be the OPEN web standard, to the point where even Firefox couldn't afford not to support it. Dark days for the free exchange of information enabled by the web.

It's true but it doesn't make sense IMO for the buck to stop at Netflix. If Netflix could have talked content providers into allowing them to use an open-source "DRM" that worked for ordinary users but which could probably be circumvented by someone with programming skills, this wouldn't happen. The problem is that legally Netflix could be on the hook for any copyright infringement that may have been facilitated by t…

This argument was more true in the early days of the web DRM debate, but the Netflix of today is largely publishing its own content rather than distributing the content of others, so it is setting the terms of how its content will be protected.

I don't think it is a coincidence that Netflix's more aggressive anti-piracy actions and rollout of more DRM-enabled platform choices has come at a time that they're distributing more of their own content.

Re: Update on HTML5 Video for Netflix

#127

Post by apostacy »

This is the strategy Microsoft tried over a decade ago with ActiveX. And Firefox saved us. It was starting to be normalized, to have to install ActiveX controls to view certain content.

Companies like CinemaNow[1] offered Netflix-like streaming movie services using Microsoft's ActiveX based Janus DRM over a decade ago. Thankfully, the community had more of a backbone back then.

Firefox and Linux were not broken because they didn't support Microsoft's crummy software. I considered it a major feature, actually.

Microsoft was trying to push the narrative that if you wanted to truly get a first class experience of the web, you had to be running Windows and Internet Explorer. Microsoft made it easy to just use the Trident engine, and get locked into their ecosystem.

Now, the same thing is happening again, except that Mozilla is on board with it. It's only a matter of time until Firefox is just a wrapper for webkit, and websites will compel you to install EMEs that will force you to watch ads.

[1] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/CinemaNow

Re: Update on HTML5 Video for Netflix

#129

Post by OhSoHumble »

hsivonen wrote: post #104
mmagin wrote: post #5

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Nevermind that the binary blobs come from pretty much the same place: https://wiki.mozilla.org/Media/EME#Platform_Support (Ok, I guess on Linux it's a blob from a Google-owned company.)

The previous DRM plug-in (Silverlight) was made by Microsoft. The new one (Widevine CDM) is made by Google.

I was hopeful that the announcement from Mozilla applied to BSD. If Widevine is used, then this will be Linux only. Still good news, however.

Re: Update on HTML5 Video for Netflix

#130

Post by ce4 »

criddell wrote: post #48
cyborgx7 wrote: post #2

Translation: Netflix successfully lobied DRM into what is supposed to be the OPEN web standard, to the point where even Firefox couldn't afford not to support it. Dark days for the free exchange of information enabled by the web.

I thought that the only change was that the DRM mechanism was turned into an open standard. How is this worse than before? As someone that occasionally uses Linux, I think it's great that Netflix works there now. Previously, the audience on Linux wasn't worth the development effort for Netflix. Am I missing something? Is this a case where an open standard is a bad thing?

It will open DRM to every other websites as well as the barrier to DRM is now low enough for everyone.
Post reply on HN