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

151–160 of 524 posts

Re: Update on HTML5 Video for Netflix

#151

Post by hsivonen »

sandov wrote: post #102
josteink wrote: post #64

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> Am I missing something? Is this a case where an open standard Yes. The bit where this is an "open standard" to implement completely closed, non-standard plugins, which cannot be implemented by reading the spec. With this "open standard" any browser or OS not blessed by Hollywood can't have a full web experience. And I take great issues with that.

Could we "fork the web" or something?. Someone could create a parallel stack of web standards that is fully free/open. For the most part it would be the same as the conventional web standard, but open source browser developers would have something to base their developments on, something like the "OpenWeb Stack". Sorry for my bad english.

Uncheck the “Play DRM content” checkbox in Firefox, and you have your parallel stack right there. Does it still play Netflix that way? No.

Re: Update on HTML5 Video for Netflix

#152

Post by TeMPOraL »

kmicklas wrote: post #89
futurix wrote: post #26

Earlier quoted context omitted.

When the choice is between proprietary apps or DRM for multimedia content inside open web environment, I'd rather have the latter. Yes, in ideal world there will be DRM-free streaming - but unfortunately that's unrealistic.

> but unfortunately that's unrealistic. Why is it unrealistic? Hollywood just needs to be pushed harder. It worked for music no?

Did it? I have a feeling we're about to see more DRM with music. All the pieces are falling into place. Files get replaced with streaming (which is to files what a service is to a product), and I wonder how long it will take before more companies will follow Apple's suit by ditching the audio jack. Going full digital there will enable companies to set up fully DRMed path from memory to speakers/headphones, like they did with video.

Re: Update on HTML5 Video for Netflix

#153

Post by izacus »

criddell wrote: post #112
azakai wrote: post #79

Earlier quoted context omitted.

First, the DRM is still not standard. Only the interface to it is. Every browser must still deal directly with the DRM provider and hope to reach an agreement with them, both technically and financially. As a result, only certain platforms are supported. New browsers face a new barrier to entry, in particular - the exact opposite of how the Web is support to work. Second, this is worse in the sense that Netflix, Goog…

> First, the DRM is still not standard. Only the interface to it is. Is a programming language a good analogy? The C++ spec says what a switch-statement should do, but nothing about how it must be implemented, right? > New browsers face a new barrier to entry It's not really a new barrier to entry though, is it? If I wrote a browser last year, were my chances of getting Netflix to support it better then than they are…

> Is a programming language a good analogy? The C++ spec says what a switch-statement should do, but nothing about how it must be implemented, right?

No it isn't. Example: Netflix will ask for Widevine DRM provider (and exactly that provider!). It's a proprietary closed licensed platform and your system needs to have their binary blob licensed and compiled for it. If you don't have it and didn't pay for it, you won't be able to decrypt the DRM. Of course to get your DRM blob to run, you'll also have to prove and promise to the DRM provider that you have locked out the user from their own device so they won't be able to accidentally record the video they watch.

It's impossible to make your own open implementation or compete with existing players because they built the fact that you need to negotiate with them for licensing into the standard.

Re: Update on HTML5 Video for Netflix

#154

Post by technofiend »

mozumder wrote: post #131
JoshTriplett wrote: post #9

Earlier quoted context omitted.

It was indeed, since people had started recognizing the problems with Flash and Silverlight, and they'd have been much easier to kill off. DRM should have stayed second-class, leaving the way open for competitors to offer a first-class web experience as long as they left DRM behind.

Sorry, but Hollywood has the upper hand here. Hollywood has no desire to enter an open platform. They're completely happy if none of their movies are online, ever. Really. They already have a massively profitable distribution system in the theaters. The problem is that people want to watch Hollywood movies on their computer, including people that use Linux. So what do you tell those people to do? Tell them run Window…

That's true but Hollywood has been dead wrong so many times it's laughable. They've been dragged kicking and screaming from one giant pile of money to the next. Don't forget the former head of the MPAA Jack Valenti's testimony to Congress in 1982:

>We are facing a very new and a very troubling assault on our fiscal security, on our very economic life and we are facing it from a thing called the video cassette recorder and its necessary companion called the blank tape. And it is like a great tidal wave just off the shore. This video cassette recorder and the blank tape threaten profoundly the life-sustaining protection, I guess you would call it, on which copyright owners depend, on which film people depend, on which television people depend and it is called copyright.

But hey if Hollywood wants to refund every purchase I made adjusting for inflation and with interest of VCRs, LaserDisc Players, DVD Players, BluRay players and all the titles I bought on them over and over then fine let's go back to you can only ever see a movie in a theatre.

Yes I realize DVD and BluRay have DRM but there was just as much wailing and gnashing of teeth over those media when introduced and each one was more profitable than the last and remain so even though their DRM is now broken. Contrast that with the failed DIVX platform and you can see what consumers want versus what Hollywood does are very much out of sync.

Re: Update on HTML5 Video for Netflix

#155

Post by ethbro »

yuhong wrote: post #139
mozumder wrote: post #131

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Sorry, but Hollywood has the upper hand here. Hollywood has no desire to enter an open platform. They're completely happy if none of their movies are online, ever. Really. They already have a massively profitable distribution system in the theaters. The problem is that people want to watch Hollywood movies on their computer, including people that use Linux. So what do you tell those people to do? Tell them run Window…

I wonder why Hollywood was taken over by lawyers in the first place. Yes, I am going back to before Sony vs Universal.

For the same reason that most fields eventually attract lawyers - Hollywood was making lots and lots of money.

Re: Update on HTML5 Video for Netflix

#156

Post by problems »

So I remember reading some early EME specs that seemed to indicate that EME encrypted content could be decoded and played by the browser's standard decoder and player - in the case of an open source browser like Firefox - hooking these decoding functions is quite trivial. Is this the means they've gone with or does this EME blob include their own decoder and player?

EDIT: This little image here: https://www.w3.org/TR/2016/CR-encrypted-media-20160705/stack... in the bottom right indicates that "CDM implementations may return decrypted frames or render them directly".

Would be very interesting to see a generic CDM hook which could dump all the in-and-out calls to a given CDM.

Re: Update on HTML5 Video for Netflix

#157

Post by SwellJoe »

always_good wrote: post #149
SwellJoe wrote: post #15

I don't like DRM, but I like binging Netflix in a corner on my laptop while I work. I've been doing it for years using Chrome with a fake user-agent to fool Netflix into thinking I'm on Windows (apparently that hasn't been needed for some time?) So...I'm torn, I guess. I'm glad Linux/Firefox can Netflix, but I'd like it if web standards were open and not patent encumbered. I guess it's a political issue and not a tec…

> I like binging Netflix in a corner on my > laptop while I work My girlfriend and some friends do this during work/chores, but I'm wondering how that works. Are there really shows that aren't good enough to warrant your undivided attention, yet good enough to watch in the first place? I really can't think of any for myself. If I don't mind missing chunks of a show, then I don't really want to watch it in the first p…

Mostly re-runs, but also scifi/fantasy stuff that isn't great, but still provides occasional moments of, "huh, that was interesting". Most recently I was binging The 100 while working. It's not good enough to really hold my attention, but it's also a fun post-apocalyptic story with a pretty good cast.

I mostly listen to music while working, but sometimes mindless TV is good, too. Probably not while I'm doing hard stuff, but some days I have a lot of mindless stuff to churn through.

Re: Update on HTML5 Video for Netflix

#158

Post by hsivonen »

CJefferson wrote: post #85
josteink wrote: post #44

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> When the choice is between proprietary apps or DRM for multimedia content inside open web environment Why? That puts the cost of DRM on everyone except the ones who want to freeload on our open tech to take our freedom away. And that's ass backwards. You want non-free and closed? Cool deal. Go build it yourself.

You want free and open? Go build that yourself. People do build Firefox and chrome without this, go download them and enjoy yourself.

If you don't want Widevine, you can simply uncheck the “Play DRM content” checkbox in Mozilla-distributed Firefox, and the CDM doesn’t get downloaded and gets deleted if it was already downloaded. No need for a different build. Be sure to uninstall Flash and Silverlight, too.

Re: Update on HTML5 Video for Netflix

#159

Post by mgbmtl »

apostacy wrote: post #127

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 becau…

Interesting point about ActiveX, but I think that Flash killed (or stopped the proliferation) of ActiveX, at least for video. Flash "just worked".

Don't get me wrong, I use Firefox and I don't use Netflix or Flash, but most people are quite content on Chrome. For Firefox to stand up to Netflix, it would need more than at 15% market share. Firefox is doing what it can to survive. If someone lacks a backbone, it's the W3C :(

Re: Update on HTML5 Video for Netflix

#160

Post by jakebasile »

always_good wrote: post #149
SwellJoe wrote: post #15

I don't like DRM, but I like binging Netflix in a corner on my laptop while I work. I've been doing it for years using Chrome with a fake user-agent to fool Netflix into thinking I'm on Windows (apparently that hasn't been needed for some time?) So...I'm torn, I guess. I'm glad Linux/Firefox can Netflix, but I'd like it if web standards were open and not patent encumbered. I guess it's a political issue and not a tec…

> I like binging Netflix in a corner on my > laptop while I work My girlfriend and some friends do this during work/chores, but I'm wondering how that works. Are there really shows that aren't good enough to warrant your undivided attention, yet good enough to watch in the first place? I really can't think of any for myself. If I don't mind missing chunks of a show, then I don't really want to watch it in the first p…

I don't make a habit of it, but sometimes I'll have Twitch or something running in PIP mode while working. If I'm alone at home it can get pretty quiet and I don't always want music on.

It's a bit like white noise. I'm guessing this person uses Netflix in a similar way.

Post reply on HN