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

441–450 of 524 posts

Re: Update on HTML5 Video for Netflix

#441

Post by rtpg »

kibwen wrote: post #161
zanny wrote: post #108

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I wouldn't, and they knew that. They knew the adoption rates for out-of-browser proprietary content viewers were awful. That is why they dedicated resources to usurp the open web. If Mozilla had fought back, we might have progressed towards the death of the obsolete content model big media wants to keep in place and prevent change in the market. It would have at least been a step in the right direction - instead, the…

Mozilla did fight back, but nobody in the OSS community at large bothered to care about EME until the writing was already on the wall. I remember being at the Mozilla Summit 2013 discussing Mozilla's alternative proposals, but even by then the prevailing mood was that of imminent despair at the inevitable.

out of curiosity, what alternative proposals were offered?

Re: Update on HTML5 Video for Netflix

#442

Post by flukus »

Silhouette wrote: post #419
flukus wrote: post #416

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Ok, what if a machine is compromised (there are millions of zombie boxes out there)? Someone can gain access, do their stuff and then upload the result. Are they going to start suing grandmas with weak wifi passwords? That worked so well for the RIAA last time.

Then it'll be up to the person whose account was accessed to provide some evidence that something like this happened and that it wasn't their fault. That's how these things work. You go to court, you make your case and the other side makes theirs, and the court draws its conclusions and acts accordingly. However, you don't just get to conveniently avoid taking any responsibility when there are videos being distribute…

> That's how these things work. You go to court, you make your case and the other side makes theirs, and the court draws its conclusions and acts accordingly.

Currently the burden of evidence is far too low. Something being done with my account, or even my machine is not evidence that I've done anything wrong.

> However, you don't just get to conveniently avoid taking any responsibility when there are videos being distributed that are specifically linked to an account you signed up for that clearly said you couldn't redistribute the content you got through it

How are we supposed to take responsibility for the actions of others? Should we be liable for crimes committed due to the insecurity of home networks? If so the computer industry has much bigger problems than DRM.

Re: Update on HTML5 Video for Netflix

#443

Post by k_ »

cwyers wrote: post #162
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.

I don't get it. You argue that not being able to visit Netflix "isn't the full experience," and so people won't choose a browser where they can't visit Netflix. So, because of this... all standards-compliant browsers should be unable to visit Netflix? So then why would anyone choose a standards-compliant browser?

It is not "not being able to visit Netflix" which isn't the full web experience. Web-based DRM will spread to other services, maybe even to other things than video.

I couldn't care less about Netflix, I never intended to use their services and never will, but this really is bad news for the web.

Netflix on the web with a plugin was fine for me: people wanting to watch Netflix on their standards-compliant browser would need to install a proprietary plugin to do so, and would have done it (at least a great number would have, I guess). It was their choice to do so (the other one being not to watch Netflix in a browser, and yes it _is_ a choice).

The difference (and it's big to me) was that it had _no_ impact on people not wanting to watch Netflix in their browser. These people did not have this proprietary code running in their browser and all the potential security issues coming with it.

IMO the browsers should (and I don't actually know if they do or not atm, this is a thing I need to check soon) at the very least let people opt in or out of this. Of course if they opt out they wouldn't be able to use services like Netflix.

And here comes the browser plugins world again... So much for killing flash (which was and still is a _great_ platform for small to medium web games).

Re: Update on HTML5 Video for Netflix

#444

Post by thirdsun »

eugeniub wrote: post #376
derekp7 wrote: post #336

Earlier quoted context omitted.

We somehow got away from DRM on audio. I was wondering how to do this for video too. What worked for audio, was that you had one vendor (Apple) that had a large enough market share. In order to sell DRMd media that worked on Ipods, the media companies had to sell through Apple. Or they could sell non-DRMd files that would still work on Ipods. They did the calculation, and figured they would make more money going non-…

> We somehow got away from DRM on audio. Did we? Look at Apple Music, Spotify, and other subscription music services. They all have DRM.

How else would a subscription service work? If you bought your music instead of renting it you'd truly own it without DRM or any other strings attached.

As a very frequent music buyer, I'd say the situation is very comfortable and user-friendly and I'd wish to see the same for video content.

Re: Update on HTML5 Video for Netflix

#445

Post by flukus »

Silhouette wrote: post #440
boomboomsubban wrote: post #437

Earlier quoted context omitted.

A compromised account is a vague possibility? I'm not amazing at these things, but I could probably access a WiFi network unconnected to me, mask my IP to a different location, and acquire a random Netflix account in a couple of hours. These things are likely, and wrongful lawsuits greatly damage the company while successful ones provide a minimal benefit.

I'm not amazing at these things, but I could probably access a WiFi network unconnected to me, mask my IP to a different location, and acquire a random Netflix account in a couple of hours. Really? How would you do that, exactly? If you're looking online and find camcorder copies of videos that were served to a specific customer at a specific time, as confirmed by the watermarking, and your server logs show that that…

> Really? How would you do that, exactly?

Wireless isn't very secure, you're mileage may vary on the encryption mechanism but here is a guide to hacking WPA networks (with WEP it takes seconds):

http://www.hackingtutorials.org/wifi-hacking-tutorials/how-t...

From there you can try a range of known exploits and gain admin access to a PC, after that it's game over, they can run what they want, when the want. There is no careful crafting necessary, the process can be largely automated.

We aren't talking camcorder copies, but exact digital replicas from the netflix stream.

Re: Update on HTML5 Video for Netflix

#446

Post by kriro »

jMyles wrote: post #396
derekp7 wrote: post #336

Earlier quoted context omitted.

We somehow got away from DRM on audio. I was wondering how to do this for video too. What worked for audio, was that you had one vendor (Apple) that had a large enough market share. In order to sell DRMd media that worked on Ipods, the media companies had to sell through Apple. Or they could sell non-DRMd files that would still work on Ipods. They did the calculation, and figured they would make more money going non-…

> For video, people don't download it and take it with them (typically) ...which is crazy, especially for HD video. Why use the bandwidth every time you want to watch something when storage is so much cheaper?

I'd say this is false. I'd love to watch more videos when I commute. My Pay TV provider even offers a download option for their streaming sub service(DRMed and self destructing after X days I think, never tried it) which would indicate that there's certainly market demand for it.

Re: Update on HTML5 Video for Netflix

#447

Post by cyphar »

Dagwoodie wrote: post #381
merb wrote: post #308

Earlier quoted context omitted.

isn't the Nintendo Switch based on either OpenBSD or FreeBSD and uses ARM? woudn't that be a good reason to have a plugin for that? > https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Nintendo_Switch_system_softwar...

Linux running FreeBSD Kernel, last I heard.

> Linux running FreeBSD Kernel, last I heard.

Do you mean GNU running the FreeBSD kernel? Linux is only a kernel.

Re: Update on HTML5 Video for Netflix

#448

Post by SwellJoe »

wnevets wrote: post #147
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…

>(as they're evil on net neutrality now that they are in a position of strength). what is this in reference to?

This is a pretty good rundown of it: http://www.theverge.com/2017/3/20/14960154/netflix-net-neutr...

The short answer is that, as with many corporations that find themselves in a position of significant leverage, their stance on the open internet has softened. They know they wield enough influence to keep the pipes flowing for their content...and, to hell with any tiny Netflix competitors that might spring up that don't have that kind of clout.

Re: Update on HTML5 Video for Netflix

#449

Post by unicornporn »

recursive wrote: post #329
amelius wrote: post #325

Earlier quoted context omitted.

What exactly do you think this DRM will stop? 1. People who have access to the content can usually see it over and over again (when they have a subscription to a service like Netflix). DRM will do nothing here. 2. People who don't have access to the content can't even see the DRM'ed version of the file, so DRM will do nothing here either. 3. People who want to pirate (illegally distribute) the content have advanced t…

Whether you have access to content isn't an immutable fact of your genetics. People can freely move between groups 1 and 2. That's the whole point. For instance, I didn't have access to netflix content, and then I signed up for a netflix account and paid them money, and now I do have access.

> Whether you have access to content isn't an immutable fact of your genetics. People can freely move between groups 1 and 2. That's the whole point.

So you're saying people could move to another jurisdiction to be able to watch their favorite show on Netflix? Yeah, that truly sounds like freedom to me. Or am I misinterpretating you?

Re: Update on HTML5 Video for Netflix

#450

Post by Twisell »

josteink wrote: post #432
drdrey wrote: post #409

Earlier quoted context omitted.

But music you buy on iTunes is DRM-free. That's a significant step away from DRM.

> But music you buy on iTunes is DRM-free. That's a significant step away from DRM. And Amazon. And Google Play music. And band-camp. Etc etc. In fact, I don't know a single place on the entire internet which still sells DRMed music. Such a thing simply ceased to exist. Imagine if we could make the same happen for video. That would be real nice.

Yes but in Netflix case and html5 we are precisely talking about streaming service.

Download should be DRM free for free for vidéo that's true but don't blame Netflix for using DRM on a streaming service as every music streaming service does that too.

Indeed I think studios could reduce pirating to baseline (people who can't afford anyway) in a split second should they understand that people are willing to pay for a fair priced streaming service like Netflix. They just need to open up their catalogs like music majors finally did as an average wallet can hardly sustain a dozen different subscriptions in order to have a decent movie catalog.

Post reply on HN