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

491–500 of 524 posts

Re: Update on HTML5 Video for Netflix

#491

Post by problems »

wildmusings wrote: post #487
problems wrote: post #417

Earlier quoted context omitted.

They quite frankly can't technically, only legally - they're selling a 0 margin good, anyone who has it can basically give away infinite copies at zero cost per additional copy. Anyone who wants it for free will have it for free. They need no more than drop a few words into Google or type the name of something into a fully automatic tool like Sonarr. It's pointless for them to bother trying to stop piracy, especially…

"but it's not perfect, someone could just xyz and abc and get around the system." DRM is not about being perfect against a dedicated pirate. Just like locks on doors, it's about putting up a few barriers that serve to keep the vast majority of people honest. No one is under any illusions that DRM will stop movies and games from showing up on torrent trackers.

There's a big different between breaking a door down to bypass a lock and pirating a movie via bittorrent though.

It doesn't "keep honest people honest" when piracy is so damn easy regardless of what they do with DRM. The point of that phrase is to increase the effort and motivation necessary to commit a crime - in this case, DRM doesn't do that. With or without DRM any idiot can download the latest Popcorn Time fork and stream movies with 1 click. DRM doesn't hinder the most casual of pirates at all, it only hinders honest customers.

Re: Update on HTML5 Video for Netflix

#492

Post by problems »

Razengan wrote: post #425
problems wrote: post #417

Earlier quoted context omitted.

They quite frankly can't technically, only legally - they're selling a 0 margin good, anyone who has it can basically give away infinite copies at zero cost per additional copy. Anyone who wants it for free will have it for free. They need no more than drop a few words into Google or type the name of something into a fully automatic tool like Sonarr. It's pointless for them to bother trying to stop piracy, especially…

So how do we ensure people keep making quality content and software? Should they give it away for free by default and just count on charity? Seems to me the only ultimate solution is to have some kind of guaranteed basic income, at least for all people that aren't involved in the creation of tangible goods (that can't be copied at zero cost).

Or - without doing any of that - just ship it on the honor system - no DRM. GOG does it and they still get more than 1 sale per game.

Re: Update on HTML5 Video for Netflix

#493

Post by wildmusings »

problems wrote: post #491
wildmusings wrote: post #487

Earlier quoted context omitted.

"but it's not perfect, someone could just xyz and abc and get around the system." DRM is not about being perfect against a dedicated pirate. Just like locks on doors, it's about putting up a few barriers that serve to keep the vast majority of people honest. No one is under any illusions that DRM will stop movies and games from showing up on torrent trackers.

There's a big different between breaking a door down to bypass a lock and pirating a movie via bittorrent though. It doesn't "keep honest people honest" when piracy is so damn easy regardless of what they do with DRM. The point of that phrase is to increase the effort and motivation necessary to commit a crime - in this case, DRM doesn't do that. With or without DRM any idiot can download the latest Popcorn Time fork…

People are pretty wary of using torrents because they're scared of being sued. What DRM on Netflix prevents is you ripping all of the seasons of your favorite shows, with almost no risk of getting caught, and then cancelling your Netflix subscription/sharing the rips with your friend, who is probably not inclined to use torrent sites.

Re: Update on HTML5 Video for Netflix

#494

Post by Silhouette »

flukus wrote: post #442
Silhouette wrote: post #419

Earlier quoted context omitted.

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 di…

Something being done with my account, or even my machine is not evidence that I've done anything wrong.

Yes, it is. It may not be absolute proof, but it most certainly is strong evidence.

How are we supposed to take responsibility for the actions of others?

Hopefully, you don't have to. But you also don't get to just invent some hypothetical bogeyman and use that as an excuse to ignore real evidence.

Re: Update on HTML5 Video for Netflix

#495

Post by Razengan »

Razengan wrote: post #365
zanny wrote: post #258

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Because I'm going to immediately argue with you that there is no reasonable DRM. It comes from two ideological positions. One believes that content creators need complete systemic control of what they make - at all costs (that the creator maintains full control no matter how the content is interacted with) - and the other is that content shouldn't be controlled (or that I, as a buyer of content, should control the co…

> content shouldn't be controlled (or that I, as a buyer of content, should control the content I bought) How should content creators protect against people who access their content without buying it?

> How should content creators protect against people who access their content without buying it?

This question got downvoted. What did you read into it, or which insinuation do you think it makes that you find offensive?

Re: Update on HTML5 Video for Netflix

#496

Post by asdfgadsfgasfdg »

caf wrote: post #346
asdfgadsfgasfdg wrote: post #175

Earlier quoted context omitted.

EME is a much bigger barrier than the old system of plugins. With plugins you implemented the right API for the silverlight plugin and netflix would work. In the future you need to not just implement the API but persuade someone to build the plugin for your browser and then persuade each individual DRM using site to work with your browser.

The CDM is just a plugin - on Firefox it's a Gecko Media Plugin, and it seems easier to implement the GMP API than the NPAPI for Silverlight, since it's a lot more restricted.

Please re-read my post.

These steps are not technical but they are very significant.

Consider how you would provide this plugin to your users as the author of a new browser? You have to ask the plugin authors for permission to use it.

Then consider that you have to persuade Netflix to allow the users of your browser to use their site (without changing user agents).

Neither of these steps were required with NPAPI

Re: Update on HTML5 Video for Netflix

#497

Post by MBCook »

flukus wrote: post #393
MBCook wrote: post #389

Earlier quoted context omitted.

That's why we have laws to apply negative externalities like very large jail sentences if you're caught distributing a file that you created by taping a movie off-screen.

Local solutions to global problems that don't even work locally. Those large jail sentences also place a lot of externalities on the rest of society.

I agree. My comment was not meant as an endorsement, simply a statement I think that's how they've 'solved' that issue.

Re: Update on HTML5 Video for Netflix

#498

Post by MBCook »

ubernostrum wrote: post #435
MBCook wrote: post #387

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> We somehow got away from DRM on audio. Guess which industry watched how that happened REALLY REALLY closely? The music industry was falling apart by the time they gave up on DRM, the video industry is still very strong and had time to learn where all the mistakes were made that lead to DRM free content.

The end of DRM for purchased music downloads was primarily driven by the need to break what the record industry perceived as a monopoly. They got in bed with Apple, and at first they were happy with that -- Apple showed that offering a legal way to download music would succeed, so long as it was A) convenient, B) had a suitably large catalog and C) was priced in a way customers saw as fair. And the result was Apple b…

> I suspect sooner or later the book industry will have to go DRM-free to break Amazon's ebook stranglehold, in much the same way.

I wonder about this, because the fact is that I really LIKE Amazon's system. It doesn't matter where music comes from, I listen to it over and over and usually listen to each song totally.

But with books, it takes more than 3 minutes to read. The fact that all my stuff (Kindle App, Kindle, website) know my place and sync all that stuff is very handy. It's the main reason I use Kindle over physical books.

If you load non-DRMed eBooks onto Kindle my understanding is you don't get that functionality for them and I'm guessing no one would have the power to force Amazon to implement that feature. The end result is that Amazon's DRMed books may be more appealing to me than DRM free options from other places.

As for breaking their monopoly.... Apple tried and the government smacked them down for it.

Re: Update on HTML5 Video for Netflix

#499

Post by notjoemama »

amelius wrote: post #290
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…

People have been recording the things they watch since the invention of the VCR. DRM will not have any impact on that. Someone will come along, and make a video-grabbing utility that bypasses the DRM. Also, many of the content is already available via bittorrent. DRM is pointless. But perhaps you are right about "browser vendors refusing to cooperate" not being the best possible approach. However, do you know what is…

Any free or low cost run-of-the-mill capture software renders DRM useless. If it's made out of bits, you can't ensure ownership after redistribution. In an environment like this people pay because it is quality content and access is easy. The publishers business model needs to get with the times, not strong arm browser vendors into adhering to their archaic requirements. I'm personally sick of hearing about this DRM war. There are so many more things to be concerned with. ◔̯◔

Re: Update on HTML5 Video for Netflix

#500

Post by recursive »

unicornporn wrote: post #449
recursive wrote: post #329

Earlier quoted context omitted.

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?

You're misinterpretating me. Some people already live in jurisdictions to which Netflix permits distribution of their favorite show. Those people can decide to pay for access or not.

It's also true that some people don't live in such places. But that doesn't matter. You said that DRM serves no purpose. For some it may not. But for some people it does.

Post reply on HN