Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

W3C abandons consensus, standardizes DRM, EFF resigns

boingboing.net

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

191–200 of 1001 posts

Re: W3C abandons consensus, standardizes DRM, EFF resigns

#191

Post by AnssiH »

featherverse wrote: post #5
RcouF1uZ4gsC wrote: post #4

Basically, unless you are writing a browser with decent marketshare, you defacto have no voice in making the standards. Basically, the only voices that matter are Mozilla (Firefox), Apple (Safari), Google(Chrome), and Microsoft (Edge/Explorer). Despite what any standard says, web developers are going to go by the behavior of the browsers do. The only company on the list of browser makers that really has any desire to…

I would suggest not underestimating Mozilla's market influence. It would be possible to create a browser that displays DRM content and ignores DRM. The only thing that content publishers could do is ban that browser. And then it would adapt to disguise itself as other browsers. DRM on the web can only happen if all of the major players (that is, browser publishers) agree to play along. I am very excited about this ne…

I don't believe this formal standardization will affect end-user web browser features.

All major browsers (Firefox, Chrome, IE, Edge, Safari) have already included HTML EME DRM support for years, so it is a de-facto standard already.

Re: W3C abandons consensus, standardizes DRM, EFF resigns

#192

Post by conductr »

5ilv3r wrote: post #68
Fej wrote: post #36

On one hand, this is terrible for freedom in our software; on the other, this isn't the "death of the open Web" that some are proclaiming. The media groups want DRM and they will get it. This doesn't mean that we are going to lose all freedom on the Web. It's a step in that direction, certainly, but we're sure as heck not there yet.

It is already very difficult to distribute your own content without subjecting it to some other entity's distribution system, and soon it will be impossible. Chrome and friends will refuse to load unsigned content, and then the death of the free web will be complete.

I'm not knowledgeable enough to fully disagree. However, I do not feel it is the browsers job to ignore a potentially useful technology (albeit for some evil media companies) because you have a distribution/marketing problem with your own content.

I think they will instead include this tech and make it usable for those who want it and continue supporting non-DRM media for those who don't want it. They're not going to block your ability to share your content without DRM.

Re: W3C abandons consensus, standardizes DRM, EFF resigns

#193

Post by rocqua »

LeifCarrotson wrote: post #70
cromulen wrote: post #31

I'm a bit uneducated when it comes to the cryptography involved, but I'm wondering why people here are so determined DRM can't ever work? Is it because someone will somehow get a copy and upload to torrents/streaming sites which of course won't have DRM. Thus only potentially annoying legitimate (eg. Netflix) users? Or are there other concerns?

DRM can't work because the math doesn't distinguish between receiving and decrypting content for a legal purpose like viewing it, and doing the same for an illegal purpose like copying and distributing it. If nothing else, there's the analog hole of recording the screen (which could be done in software). If it did work, that would be a legitimate reason to include these potentially dangerous, un-inspectable DRM featu…

A chain of hardware, all with private keys in a 'secure enclave' / 'TPM' can deliver DRM that is as unbreakable as the private keys are hidden and tampering detection is functioning. Really, the only hole that can't be patched is analogue recording. Realistically, tampering with the screen or cable is probably the easiest target. Though, compromising the TPM would have more widespread effects.

Re: W3C abandons consensus, standardizes DRM, EFF resigns

#194

Post by thephyber »

benevol wrote: post #95
sboselli wrote: post #38

Shame, shame, shame. We're losing the internet day by day, if we haven't done so already. I've seen people and posts here and there calling for attention on these issues, but imho it's all too subtle. We should start using harsher terminology for what's actually happening. This is flat out CORRUPTION, and I'm not seeing anyone express it as such. It's probably too late already, and unfortunately, this is merely a ref…

Capitalism at work - a handful of ultra-rich guys winning even more ground over common folks again.

Technically "capitalism" would also mention the small long-tail of web consumers that refuse to use browsers that enable these new W3C specs.

That said, most of actual market transactions involve some sort of subtle coercion or manipulation of emotions, which means they violate the core assumptions of economics. {Marketing, sales, religion/cults, magicians, A/B testing} all involve some sort of cognitive / psychological manipulation -- the core incentives of the modern economy incentivize companies to optimize for attention capture and behavior exploitation.

Re: W3C abandons consensus, standardizes DRM, EFF resigns

#195

Post by ctrl-j »

mo2k wrote: post #138
gizmo686 wrote: post #49

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Cryptogtaphically speaking, what is DRM. We want to give an untrusted user access to content, so that they can see it, without giving them access to the content, so they cannot copy it. This is simply impossible in theory. In practice, we can make copying it difficult, possibly resorting to hardware support (so decryption happens in the monitor) and rely on the DMCA to make any attempts to break DRM illegal. Of cours…

I know content creators. There is a large group that hate their content being copied. That's not going to change.

> I know content creators. There is a large group that hate their content being copied.

And yet, most content creators I know recognize that the "old ways" are dying, and community involvement and other value adds are the way of the future.

Look at youtube (pre ad-pocolypse), twitch, and patreon. DRM isn't where the money is at with content-creation. Spotify, apple-music, et. al. don't pay their artists nearly enough. The future of content is in direct distribution - not billionaire funded recording companies.

Re: W3C abandons consensus, standardizes DRM, EFF resigns

#196

Post by prophesi »

throwaway613834 wrote: post #99
prophesi wrote: post #69

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> Why can't it? They've been trying to accomplish this for many years now, to no avail. This is a nontrivial problem.

>> It could be easy to view but hard to save and distribute. Why can't it? > They've been trying to accomplish this for many years now, to no avail. Any evidence that they haven't had any success whatsoever in making it harder to save/distribute?

Sure. Search for a recent videogame on pirate bay, download a youtube-to-mp3 browser extension, get the calibre DeDRM plugin. Or, if you really want to understand my point, download and learn how to use a disassembler.

For the casual law-abiding user, it succeeds in making it harder to save/distribute. For everyone else, it's only a matter of time before the DRM is broken.

Re: W3C abandons consensus, standardizes DRM, EFF resigns

#198

Post by azakai »

CJefferson wrote: post #101
wolfgke wrote: post #71

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> We're losing the internet day by day, if we haven't done so already. Let's just "fork" the web from W3C (or 3WC as some people like to call them by now) instead.

No, the W3C is the web. You'd be forking to what? This was basically wanted by Firefox, Apple, Microsoft and Google. They are the modern web. Trying to go against them is how we ended up with XHTML, a standard no-one really wanted, or implemented.

> This was basically wanted by Firefox, Apple, Microsoft and Google.

Not accurate. EME was created and driven by Google, Microsoft and Netflix, as you can see here:

https://www.w3.org/TR/encrypted-media/

Firefox opposed it very strongly, and only gave in and implemented it when it was clear that all other browsers were behind it - at that point the battle was already lost.

When the EFF says

> The W3C process has been abused by companies that made their fortunes by upsetting the established order, and now, thanks to EME, they’ll be able to ensure no one ever subjects them to the same innovative pressures.

It is safe to assume the companies the EFF refers to are Google and Microsoft.

Re: W3C abandons consensus, standardizes DRM, EFF resigns

#200

Post by rocqua »

whipoodle wrote: post #114
cromulen wrote: post #31

I'm a bit uneducated when it comes to the cryptography involved, but I'm wondering why people here are so determined DRM can't ever work? Is it because someone will somehow get a copy and upload to torrents/streaming sites which of course won't have DRM. Thus only potentially annoying legitimate (eg. Netflix) users? Or are there other concerns?

To me the more interesting question is why this particular issue is so important that W3C felt compelled to break consensus. I think the answer to that question is a lot more revealing than another "DRM is evil vs you're an unrealistic hippie" fight. Even if we take it for granted that DRM is good... why?

Given that apparently, google (Chrome), Microsoft (IE and edge) and Apple (Safari) supported the proposal, one could defend the decision as necessary to prevent obsolescence. That is, if they did not pass this, they'd just be ignored by 3 out of the 4 most popular browser producers.
Post reply on HN