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

201–210 of 524 posts

Re: Update on HTML5 Video for Netflix

#201

Post by cgearhart »

maxerickson wrote: post #72
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.

Another way to look at it is that Netflix isn't part of the web. I suppose that viewpoint admits that obstinance on the part of Firefox was not going to get Netflix to offer their service without DRM.

Only insofar as Netflix was opting not to put their content on the web. Netflix was _not_ prevented from being on the web pre-DRM -- it's just that responsibility for meeting their requirements for access to content rested with them rather than browser developers.

edit: not really sure how I messed up the original comment, which was an incoherent mess.

Re: Update on HTML5 Video for Netflix

#202

Post by pornel »

problems wrote: post #156

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…

This diagram and most of non-normative parts of the spec are a deliberate red herring. The purpose of these is to derail discussion about DRM restrictions by saying that any restrictions are optional.

However, during discussions at W3C Netflix representatives confirmed that their implementation doesn't work like this. They are only interested in "strong" DRM model in which the player is not trusted and has no ability to see decrypted data, so it can't even use its regular HTML5 codec to decode it.

Re: Update on HTML5 Video for Netflix

#203

Post by yuhong »

ethbro wrote: post #155
yuhong wrote: post #139

Earlier quoted context omitted.

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.

Which makes me more interested in more details on why.

Re: Update on HTML5 Video for Netflix

#204

Post by bubblethink »

Marginally related: Are there any new developments worth following on the anonymous & decentralized content distribution front ? Bit torrent is decades old. TOR doesn't work for these cases. I don't know if zeronet is a good fit. Who is working on the next big bit torrent replacement ?

Re: Update on HTML5 Video for Netflix

#205

Post by cgearhart »

MBCook wrote: post #69
davexunit wrote: post #10

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Dark days, indeed. Sacrificing the open web so some can watch movies.

To a huge chunk of users video IS the web. If Netflix, Hulu, and YouTube didn't work (assume YT adopts DRM) the browser would basically be DOA for a HUGE chunk of people.

So...the _entire_ web should be saddled with DRM because people who don't care about the web wouldn't use it otherwise? Is the web better now because all those people now have _another_ way to passively consume video content?

Re: Update on HTML5 Video for Netflix

#206

Post by draw_down »

cr0sh wrote: post #192

This may be an extreme view, but have you ever wondered why DRM exists? It exists because highly intelligent people designed it, developed it, and encoded it as software, in exchange for money. Period. Ok - that's a simplification, but it isn't too far from the truth. These people (short of some kind of compartmentalized R&D model where nobody knew the complete picture - which I doubt happened in this case) each were…

I think it's a mistake to put such things on those who implement. For any given bad idea, there will always be people willing to take money to implement it.

Re: Update on HTML5 Video for Netflix

#207

Post by notyourwork »

sidlls wrote: post #140
notyourwork wrote: post #96

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> This isn't any different from the compatibility issues across desktop operating systems. You wouldn't expect a mac desktop app binary to "just work" when double-clicked on a Windows OS. It actually is a completely different issue. The web is a standard, browsers implement that standard. It isn't perfect but its not the same intention as different OS architecture.

Yes, hence my comment about the argument being made null by the existence of a standard--but that's only in theory. In practice, often because of OS-driven constraints (e.g. the desktop vs Android version of any given browser), different tradeoffs with respect to the quality, breadth, and depth of implementation differ. The point is this: the existence of a standard doesn't guarantee uniformity in implementations.

Based on that premise, why do we even have a standard? Oh yea, because of the intention for interoperability.

Re: Update on HTML5 Video for Netflix

#209

Post by mtgx »

kibwen wrote: post #21
davexunit wrote: post #6

This only works because of DRM infecting web standards. Thanks for hurting the web, Netflix.

Let's give credit where credit is due: the EME proposal was jointly authored by Netflix, Microsoft, and Google: https://www.w3.org/TR/encrypted-media/

Both of which have an interest in having control over media platforms.

DRM = control. See Apple and iTunes DRM for the first decade of its existence. Same with Amazon and the Kindle.

And now see how Microsoft is already abusing that power to say that its Edge browser can deliver higher resolution Netflix shows - not because it's any better at rendering videos than Chrome and Firefox, but because it's uses its Windows DRM to only allow Edge to play higher-quality Netflix videos. Hashtag #NewMicrosoft

Re: Update on HTML5 Video for Netflix

#210

Post by artursapek »

cr0sh wrote: post #167
artursapek wrote: post #88

Earlier quoted context omitted.

So it's ok to steal things that are easy to steal?

Stealing implies that the theft of the "thing" denies the original owner of possession and use of that same "thing". Digital IP is different - you can make infinite copies of it. A copy I make does not diminish your copy, nor does it deprive you of possession of your copy, or usage of that copy. What it does deny you is the amount of money which you might have made on the sale of that copy (if you are the rights-hold…

If the very large number took hundreds of people and millions of dollars to come up with, and it brings you pleasure, then yes, merely copying it when it's legally available for rent is wrong. Obviously stealing physical things is different from stealing digital things, but they are both fundamentally wrong because by doing so you're denying the creators the return on their investment.

The manufacturing (copying) cost for digital content being 0 doesn't really matter; it just means that the net cost of production is front-loaded. I can invest $30,000,000 in a housing complex with a tangible amount of units, or a Hollywood movie with infinite "units". I still deserve to get a return on my investment.

Post reply on HN