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

231–240 of 524 posts

Re: Update on HTML5 Video for Netflix

#231

Post by dasil003 »

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.

Sorry, but as someone who spent nearly a decade founding and building a premium content VOD service, and 6 of those years fighting fiercely against DRM and making great content available without DRM, I have both the knowledge and moral authority to say that you're living in a fantasy world. You might as well say that anyone who is not living an RMS-sanctioned ascetic technology lifestyle is hurting the cause of free software everywhere. Technically that might be true, but a few true believers martyring themselves is not going to change the social and political forces that drive software over time.

Here's the bottom line: browser makers have absolutely zero leverage over DRM. Firefox refusing to implement DRM would have been 1000 times more likely to lead to Firefox's irrelevance and death than it would lead to rightsholders caving on DRM requirements. Even if all browsers banded together and refused, all that would mean is that premium content would not be available in browsers, and that would lead to a significant devaluation of the web in favor of proprietary apps. It is a techno-centric fantasy to think that browser makers have even a modicum of leverage here. The fact is content producers would restrict themselves to licensed devices in a heartbeat, and they would get away with it to, because at the end of the day, people want to watch what they want to watch.

EME is a ideological compromise, sure, but it's a net benefit to the open web since its scope is small and it maintains the overall schema of web standards. It shouldn't be considered worse than proprietary plugins with arbitrary scope.

Re: Update on HTML5 Video for Netflix

#232

Post by BuuQu9hu »

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.

A standard _allows_ for uniformity, the only barriers are technical. CDM providers are actively _preventing_ uniformity. There is a massive difference.

Re: Update on HTML5 Video for Netflix

#233

Post by tptacek »

Touche wrote: post #124
tptacek wrote: post #100

Earlier quoted context omitted.

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.

The point of EME is to minimize the amount of code that differs between platforms, by standardizing everything but (in essence) the authenticated key derivation step.

Re: Update on HTML5 Video for Netflix

#234

Post by wildmusings »

problems wrote: post #135
wildmusings wrote: post #116

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Or more realistically, if Mozilla had fought back, more people would simply have stopped using Firefox.

Yeah, the problem started when people decided installing a browser from an ad agency seemed like a good idea.

Why is reasonable DRM a problem in the first place? I'm paying Netflix $8 a month to watch thousands of movies whenever I want. Being constrained to a large number of devices that take some steps to prevent someone from ripping the movies is a fair tradeoff. It works flawlessly on my computer, on my phone, and on my xbox. The DRM hasn't bothered me once.

Re: Update on HTML5 Video for Netflix

#235

Post by throw2016 »

I think with open source and standards we lose control the moment things become too complex for a group of open source developers to develop. At this point you need funding, organized efforts or corporate backers who bring their own agendas. Or be on the sidelines for decades while the work is done incrementally like Linux.

For web browsers we have long passed that point. The level of complexity and ongoing effort rules out independent projects which means we are stuck with large corporate efforts like Chrome, Edge, Safari or token open ones like Firefox that trade on openness but are happy to collude with other browser makers to act against user interests.

With this kind of ecosystem its inevitable user interests or things like open web standards will be thrown under the bus when it has no benefits to the projects.

Mozilla has enough resources to take a stand against this or collaborate with orgs like EFF and try to rally users. It has certainly done that before, but nothing happened here. If Netflix wants to deliver DRM let them make their own app, there is no need to get browsers involved in any way.

Linux was never about convenience, it was and is about openness and users and developers have persevered for decades to get here. It would have been 'convenient' to stick to Windows at the outset but then there would be no Linux as we know it today.

Re: Update on HTML5 Video for Netflix

#236

Post by futurix »

hsivonen wrote: post #128
futurix wrote: post #30

I hope this means the end of Silverlight on the desktop - as it is still required for Amazon Video and NOW TV (in the UK at least).

Amazon Video works with EME+Widevine, too. What makes you say it still requires Silverlight?

Because last time I checked it on the desktop (2-3 months ago) - it did. I'm very happy it is no longer the case!

Re: Update on HTML5 Video for Netflix

#237

Post by antisthenes »

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…

> Are there really shows that aren't good enough to warrant your undivided attention, yet good enough to watch in the first place?

As someone with ADHD: that's going to be most of the shows I ever watch. Unless it's really one of the best shows or movies I've ever seen (like The Wire or something from IMDB's top 50), it's really hard to give it complete undivided attention and probably not worth it anyway.

Re: Update on HTML5 Video for Netflix

#238

Post by komali2 »

criley2 wrote: post #187
dkonofalski wrote: post #174

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I don't know if I'm just looking too far into your comment, but I don't see why you're blaming Netflix (or it seems you are) or how you got to them being the bad guys for this? They're not the ones that make the content. If it was up to Netflix, they would just release their shows DRM-free on Netflix for any platform. Unfortunately, that's not how things work and they have to bow to the demands of the content distrib…

"I don't know if I'm just looking too far into your comment, but I don't see why you're blaming Netflix (or it seems you are) or how you got to them being the bad guys for this? They're not the ones that make the content. If it was up to Netflix, they would just release their shows DRM-free on Netflix for any platform. Unfortunately, that's not how things work and they have to bow to the demands of the content distri…

Is it Netflix's sole responsibility though? Their only real legal responsibility (other than, well, to not break the law) is to add value for their shareholders. "Taking a stand against DRM" doesn't sound like that.

It sounds more like the job of the citizens to elect representatives that support a Good Internet, and if the politicians they elect turn around and screw their supporters (which isn't illegal), to elect new politicians. A pretty disgusting and slow system, sure, but the only other solution I can think of (I am not a smart man) is outright revolution, and hoping the revolutionary government is all about a Good Internet.

EDIT: I'm fine with being downvoted if I'm wrong or stupid, but I'd appreciate if someone could tell me why they believe I'm wrong or stupid.

Re: Update on HTML5 Video for Netflix

#239

Post by khedoros1 »

dasil003 wrote: post #231
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.

Sorry, but as someone who spent nearly a decade founding and building a premium content VOD service, and 6 of those years fighting fiercely against DRM and making great content available without DRM, I have both the knowledge and moral authority to say that you're living in a fantasy world. You might as well say that anyone who is not living an RMS-sanctioned ascetic technology lifestyle is hurting the cause of free…

This is all true. What has happened is probably the best out of a set of crappy options. It's only a net benefit compared to the other non-fantasy possibilities, though. EME is more something to be resigned to than happy about.

> It shouldn't be considered worse than proprietary plugins with arbitrary scope.

True. Proprietary plugins with limited scope are better than proprietary plugins with arbitrary scope, all other things being equal.

Re: Update on HTML5 Video for Netflix

#240

Post by franciscop »

dasil003 wrote: post #231
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.

Sorry, but as someone who spent nearly a decade founding and building a premium content VOD service, and 6 of those years fighting fiercely against DRM and making great content available without DRM, I have both the knowledge and moral authority to say that you're living in a fantasy world. You might as well say that anyone who is not living an RMS-sanctioned ascetic technology lifestyle is hurting the cause of free…

I don't agree with "people want to watch what they want to watch."

IMO the 2005-2015 wave of pirated content was due to the exact opposite; users (people in the living room) not going the extra literal mile to buy/rent a DVD.

With the coming of Spotify & Co the music pirate scene has pretty much died off and it's because the physical CDs are replaces by something orders of magnitude easier.

Same thing is happening with video content now that most houses have the capability of streaming it.

What people want to do after work is to sit in the sofa and press "play". They don't want to start installing software.

Post reply on HN