W3C abandons consensus, standardizes DRM, EFF resigns • Hacker News Board

Re: W3C abandons consensus, standardizes DRM, EFF resigns

#271

Post by zymhan » Mon, Sep 18, 2017, 9:31 PM UTC

DCKing wrote: post #241

Can anybody explain to me what will change because of this decision? DRM has been very much part of the internet since 1995 when RealPlayer was released. DRM has been part of content delivery ever since then. It has not ever seem to have decreased in popularity, quite the opposite. The browsers that 99.9% of people use have already implemented this standard for years anyway. It's not obvious to me that this decision…

RealPlayer was not a Web Standard like EME is. This decision codifies DRM in Web rendering standards.

Re: W3C abandons consensus, standardizes DRM, EFF resigns

#272

Post by hellbanner » Mon, Sep 18, 2017, 9:32 PM UTC

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.

Well, its corporations with money that make communication technologies.

The history of wide scale, maintainable, free speech just hasn't worked. Ever. Why should computers be any different?

Re: W3C abandons consensus, standardizes DRM, EFF resigns

#273

Post by tdy721 » Mon, Sep 18, 2017, 9:32 PM UTC

saganus wrote: post #98

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.

But how long will it take for websites to be delivered with DRM so they can't be archived,scraped, saved to disk, screenshot, etc? I agree that it's "only" a step in that direction, but this can snowball and get ugly pretty fast.

I feel you've brought the Browsers (Software, layer 5+) to an ISP fight (Layer 1-4). One that the 99% lost a long time ago. This has been snowballing for a very long time, I feel that momentum is minimal. This snowball is being pushed by pure force.

Power! Unlimited Power! -Darth Sidious

Re: W3C abandons consensus, standardizes DRM, EFF resigns

#274

Post by zymhan » Mon, Sep 18, 2017, 9:32 PM UTC

spdustin wrote: post #206

Is my math off, or is 58.4% a majority?

The first three words of the post are "W3C abandons consensus"

    con·sen·sus
    kənˈsensəs/
    noun
    general agreement.

No one said anything about a majority.

Re: W3C abandons consensus, standardizes DRM, EFF resigns

#275

Post by eh78ssxv2f » Mon, Sep 18, 2017, 9:34 PM UTC

Can somebody explain what exactly is happening here? What were the pros/cons of the move? e.g., it is possible that browsers are in a tight spot: If they fail to provide certain functionality, then content providers just move to native apps. Was that the tradeoff here?

Re: W3C abandons consensus, standardizes DRM, EFF resigns

#276

Post by objclxt » Mon, Sep 18, 2017, 9:34 PM UTC

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 would suggest not underestimating Mozilla's market influence.

They have no market influence. They have maybe ~10% of the market globally (I've seen figures between 5-15%), and that's primarily desktop - which is decreasing daily. On mobile it's even worse (probably less than 1%).

Any influence they have solely extends to the desktop, and that's not the primary way people are interacting with the internet nowadays.

Re: W3C abandons consensus, standardizes DRM, EFF resigns

#277

Post by TazeTSchnitzel » Mon, Sep 18, 2017, 9:34 PM UTC

Osmium wrote: post #230

I am so mixed about this. In principle, this is a terrible idea, and I share many of the concerns in this thread -- I am not a fan of DRM. But as a consumer/end-user, I'd much prefer a standard DRM over Flash/Silverlight any day of the week. The real question is how we get rid of DRM in the long term. Piracy isn't going away. Hopefully content owners will one day realize the economic cost of implementing DRM isn't wo…

Companies creating copyrighted works will always try to impose DRM.

The best that can be done is make circumventing it legal and easy.

Re: W3C abandons consensus, standardizes DRM, EFF resigns

#278

Post by pdpi » Mon, Sep 18, 2017, 9:34 PM UTC

wolfgke wrote: post #255

untog wrote: post #250

Earlier quoted context omitted.

...and which no-one will download. To be clear: if DRM is not implemented in browsers, Netflix and the like will just make native apps, which are far larger vectors of malware attack than the locked down EME standard is. I'm not saying this is a good thing, but "people should just not watch DRMed video" is not an actual answer to the problem at hand.

So you claim that Firefox (and other browsers) should implement malware or a malware interface into their browser so that users don't have a reason to download and install some other malware?

I don't know about the GP. I claim that a form of DRM that Mozilla begrudgingly accepts into Firefox has better odds of not turning out to to be "Sony Rootkit" literal malware than if everybody else is rolling their own.

This battle is lost, let's not lose the war to have our little Alamo moment.

Re: W3C abandons consensus, standardizes DRM, EFF resigns

#279

Post by nebabyte » Mon, Sep 18, 2017, 9:35 PM UTC

vkou wrote: post #94

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.

Great, I'm sure the enterprises on the W3C who voted for this will jump on board. Oh, you mean I can't get Netflix on the forked internet? Welp, back to mainline.

"Mainline web: 0-rated DRMed Netflix if you pay ever-more exorbitant prices for our increasingly tiered package deals that make you try and remember the joy of 'cutting the cord'"

"Alternative web: Some competition without DRM, zero-rating, or other nonneutrality bullshit"

You go ahead and stick with your Netflix, buddy, and best of luck to ya.

American ISPs and legal precedent are all of course bought up by the interests building the former, but luckily I'm not tied down here.

Re: W3C abandons consensus, standardizes DRM, EFF resigns

#280

Post by jayshua » Mon, Sep 18, 2017, 9:35 PM UTC

wolfgke wrote: post #262

andrepd wrote: post #258

Earlier quoted context omitted.

It is opt-in AFAIK.

There is no option I have to opt in whether I want a malware interface (EME) installed in my browser or not.

What makes EME a malware interface?