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

261–270 of 524 posts

Re: Update on HTML5 Video for Netflix

#261

Post by BuuQu9hu »

tptacek wrote: post #233
Touche wrote: post #124

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> 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.

This is false. EME describes only the interface between the Javascript environment and the CDM. It says nothing about the CDM's interface with the browser code, which is the heart of the issue.

Re: Update on HTML5 Video for Netflix

#262

Post by tptacek »

pdeuchler wrote: post #257
dasil003 wrote: post #231

Earlier quoted context omitted.

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 think we lost the ability to make fun of RMS once the Snowden revelations come out. Regardless... >> It is a techno-centric fantasy to think that browser makers have even a modicum of leverage here You realize the world's largest browser vendors are Google, Apple, and Microsoft... right? >> 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 ov…

Google and Apple have very little leverage. If even one major studio withdrew all their content from Apple and only made it available on Netflix, Apple could potentially lose millions of subscribers. People want to watch what they want to watch.

Re: Update on HTML5 Video for Netflix

#263

Post by tptacek »

matt4077 wrote: post #251
dasil003 wrote: post #231

Earlier quoted context omitted.

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…

Browser makers have plenty leverage. A Firefox user watching Netflix will, and this is a tautology, be worse off if they cannot continue doing so. That may lead to people switching to other browsers more often than dropping Netflix subscriptions, but the costs for Netflix wouldn't be 0, and may even be substantial considering the population of people using Firefox is self-selected to those placing a high value on ope…

Not only is it not true that Netflix would cave if they didn't have native browser support, but we know it's not true, because Netflix for years relied on plugins to deliver over browsers. Meanwhile, every year that passes, browsers have less leverage as more Netflix subscribers get their content either on set-top boxes or mobile devices (where Netflix has total end-to-end control), and fewer are stuck with browsers.

Re: Update on HTML5 Video for Netflix

#264

Post by tptacek »

BuuQu9hu wrote: post #245
tptacek wrote: post #223

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I don't think I'm missing it, so much as I'm not understanding what the material difference is between your unwillingness to run a blob on your machine versus your unwillingness to do any of the other things a business might require before issuing you a password. You are free not to run those blobs, and not to use Netflix's services. Where you lose me is the militant demand that Netflix not offer services to those wi…

You need to address this: > This is the idea of the open Web. CDMs are literally the opposite idea. Yes, both a CDM and passworded accounts limit access to content. The difference is that CDM providers are only letting certain Web browsers view the content. Passworded accounts have no such limitation. The open Web is dependent on any conceivable browser being interoperable with ALL Web content. Any barriers to intero…

EME strictly reduces the amount of "closed" code on the web. Without EME, more of the content protection stack is proprietary, and the trusted code base that enables content protection is larger. This is a very simple point that I think we all understand; I don't understand why EME's opposition thinks they can dodge it.

Re: Update on HTML5 Video for Netflix

#265

Post by tptacek »

BuuQu9hu wrote: post #261
tptacek wrote: post #233

Earlier quoted context omitted.

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.

This is false. EME describes only the interface between the Javascript environment and the CDM. It says nothing about the CDM's interface with the browser code, which is the heart of the issue.

You're rebutting an argument I didn't make. The CDM is closed-source, but it was closed-source in the pre-EME world too. My argument is that EME opens up DRM stacks; it's that it opens up more of the DRM stack than was open before it.

Re: Update on HTML5 Video for Netflix

#266

Post by Nexxxeh »

hathawsh wrote: post #115

Why do companies put so much effort into DRM when a commonly available $20 device strips it away in real time? I don't want to steal streams, I just want my HDMI devices to work together. This little gem strips HDCP so my old (but nice) receiver can talk to my newer projector: https://smile.amazon.com/gp/product/B004F9LVXC

A 4K HDR strip and capture rig is more expensive.

But Netflix and Amazon Prime content still turns up pirated in 4K. But Netflix and Amazon can be seen to be doing "everything they can to prevent piracy!"

Re: Update on HTML5 Video for Netflix

#267

Post by BuuQu9hu »

tptacek wrote: post #264
BuuQu9hu wrote: post #245

Earlier quoted context omitted.

You need to address this: > This is the idea of the open Web. CDMs are literally the opposite idea. Yes, both a CDM and passworded accounts limit access to content. The difference is that CDM providers are only letting certain Web browsers view the content. Passworded accounts have no such limitation. The open Web is dependent on any conceivable browser being interoperable with ALL Web content. Any barriers to intero…

EME strictly reduces the amount of "closed" code on the web. Without EME, more of the content protection stack is proprietary, and the trusted code base that enables content protection is larger. This is a very simple point that I think we all understand; I don't understand why EME's opposition thinks they can dodge it.

You need to address this:

> This is the idea of the open Web. CDMs are literally the opposite idea.

Re: Update on HTML5 Video for Netflix

#268

Post by pdeuchler »

tptacek wrote: post #262
pdeuchler wrote: post #257

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I think we lost the ability to make fun of RMS once the Snowden revelations come out. Regardless... >> It is a techno-centric fantasy to think that browser makers have even a modicum of leverage here You realize the world's largest browser vendors are Google, Apple, and Microsoft... right? >> 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 ov…

Google and Apple have very little leverage. If even one major studio withdrew all their content from Apple and only made it available on Netflix, Apple could potentially lose millions of subscribers. People want to watch what they want to watch.

I do not buy this for several reasons:

1) Content production is rapidly moving to an "in house" model, where subscribers are more heavily influenced by original and exclusive content

2) I doubt there would be large transfers of subscribers, more a slight depression across the board and large increases in piracy, as we saw rather distinctly with the early days of music providers (like before itunes early days)

3) Google and Apple each by themselves are worth the entirety of Hollywood many times over. I think it's less them having little leverage, and more them playing a longer game and not caring about DRM battles in the short term.

Re: Update on HTML5 Video for Netflix

#269

Post by openasocket »

snissn wrote: post #134
Hydraulix989 wrote: post #118

Earlier quoted context omitted.

From another comment, don't necessarily think of the dilemma of a netflix user, or internet browser, instead think of the of the blow to the openness of the next person that wants to make a brand new web browser. For the new browser to fully compete, they now /NEED/ to set up a closed relationship with netflix, the drm provider, the other browsers. If it was an open standard, they could simply code the crypto algorit…

So what's the alternative, exactly? Before EME, you needed Flash or Silverlight to view DRM-ed content like netflix. Someone making a brand new web browser would similarly need to support a Flash plugin or Silverlight plugin to compete. Such a developer could choose not to bother with a Flash or Silverlight plugin, but couldn't they also choose not to bother to implement EME? What's changed?

Re: Update on HTML5 Video for Netflix

#270

Post by jameskegel »

e40 wrote: post #256
franciscop wrote: post #240

Earlier quoted context omitted.

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 w…

I don't agree with "people want to watch what they want to watch." I have quite a few data points that say you are flat wrong about that. I would add to this: people watch what they want to watch and how they want to watch it. I've literally downloaded HBO shows even though I'm an HBO Now subscriber. The Roku HBO Now app is so horrible, I just hate using it.

I agree with this. My frustration is not only HBO, but also UFC. I pay for Fight Pass because I love the sport, and I want to support it, but my Roku experience is so bad that I found myself looking for other means of consuming it.
Post reply on HN