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

351–360 of 1001 posts

Re: W3C abandons consensus, standardizes DRM, EFF resigns

#351

Post by AlexMax »

mozumder wrote: post #312
5_minutes wrote: post #265

Earlier quoted context omitted.

"In 2013, EFF was disappointed to learn that the W3C had taken on the project of standardizing “Encrypted Media Extensions,” an API whose sole function was to provide a first-class role for DRM within the Web browser ecosystem" With so much money involved here, it's quite naive to believe the W3C members are virgins here and did this out love for the web and for the consumers. And: "It is clear that the W3C allowing…

DRM is also how you get media companies to publish on the web. Media companies couldn't give any less fucks about the web. They can go 100 years without publishing on the web, since they have other revenue paths that they're perfectly happy with. This whole process of enabling DRM is web developer's efforts to kiss media-companies ass in order for them to publish their products on the web. Artists and other creatives…

Very well put.

Ultimately, as long as the big content companies have content that people want to consume, they will have leverage. They want DRM, they will get DRM, or else they will take their content elsewhere, to alternative platforms that people will then flock to, making the web less relevant.

EME is the wrong hill to die on.

Re: W3C abandons consensus, standardizes DRM, EFF resigns

#352

Post by AlexMax »

AOsborn wrote: post #341
mozumder wrote: post #312

Earlier quoted context omitted.

DRM is also how you get media companies to publish on the web. Media companies couldn't give any less fucks about the web. They can go 100 years without publishing on the web, since they have other revenue paths that they're perfectly happy with. This whole process of enabling DRM is web developer's efforts to kiss media-companies ass in order for them to publish their products on the web. Artists and other creatives…

> They can go 100 years without publishing on the web, since they have other revenue paths that they're perfectly happy with. I accept your logic but disagree with your premise. Online media is the future, and any media company knows this.

They do not need the web to distribute their content online.

Re: W3C abandons consensus, standardizes DRM, EFF resigns

#353

Post by thatzerodude »

dTal wrote: post #295
bubblethink wrote: post #142

Earlier quoted context omitted.

What good is integrity if nobody uses Firefox ? That was the main reason they added EME support in the first place. Firefox staying relevant in the browser market is a better strategy in the long run than a hard line stance against DRM.

What good is Firefox if it doesn't have integrity?

True that. Time to start using Firefox forks. Pale Moon, Iceweasel, GNU Icecat.

Maybe go even further outside the box, use gngr: https://gngr.info/

Re: W3C abandons consensus, standardizes DRM, EFF resigns

#354

Post by ocdtrekkie »

ashleysmithgpu wrote: post #87
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.

Is the EFF a big enough presence to "fork" the W3C standards? I hope so.

The only party with the capability of "forking" Internet standards as we know them is Google. Because as the majority share of web browser traffic an extremely dominant percentage of web server traffic, Google can define the Internet as it wishes, and everyone else has to follow along or fall behind. This is the same with EME. Standards organizations stay relevant by accepting what Google gives them, they would simply be left behind if they didn't.

(For those who don't know, Widevine, the DRM scheme that is currently best known as compatible with EME, and which taints my Firefox browser so I can watch movies, is owned by Google.) http://www.widevine.com

(Sidebar to the sidebar: Widevine has the least Googley website you've ever seen. Stock photos of a physical padlock, HTML code entirely based on table tags for layout. It's so strange.)

Re: W3C abandons consensus, standardizes DRM, EFF resigns

#355

Post by wyager »

nobodyorother wrote: post #80
wyager wrote: post #17

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Just because some horrible thing currently happens to exist doesn't mean you need to (explicitly or implicitly) endorse it. We should make implementing DRM as expensive and inconvenient as possible.

Totally! We're going to have to start by making sure we never standardize it.

Yes, absolutely. What's confusing about that? If the DRM benefactors have to keep developing shitty, expensive, unsupported plugins that need to use unofficial APIs and therefore be updated all the time, it's going to cost a lot more to use DRM.

Re: W3C abandons consensus, standardizes DRM, EFF resigns

#356

Post by icebraining »

Crespyl wrote: post #64
idbehold wrote: post #11

Earlier quoted context omitted.

So hopefully Firefox will simply display DRM content and ignore any restriction DRM imposes.

EME plugins will use whatever user-hostile platform-specific opaque techniques necessary to communicate with the host OS in their attempt to ensure compliance. If the browser interferes with them, or the OS can't promise a "secure" chain from plugin-output > display, they can just refuse to stream the content. You can bet EME plugins will be highly platform specific, and poorly supported, if at all, on platforms that…

Firefox will heavily sandbox their EME plugins. They get no direct access to the host OS.

Re: W3C abandons consensus, standardizes DRM, EFF resigns

#357

Post by xemdetia »

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…

In recent times pretty much all the DRM vehicles have been canned as native code browser extensions have become 'bad' for malicious code. So the DRM delivery mechanisms like java plugins, flash and so on are being taken out of the web and this standard sticks it back in. I have mixed feelings about this until I really dig into how the interface is supposed to work.

So it was almost out as part of the modern web stuff, and it came back the very next day.

Re: W3C abandons consensus, standardizes DRM, EFF resigns

#358

Post by anonacct37 »

ashark wrote: post #327
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…

If someone launches a new HTML-based Web with crippled javascript ( no network comm access, for one, including ability to trigger links or forms), some small, restricted subset of CSS, and much better built-in dynamic table and form elements, I'm there . This Web's about to be eaten by DRM and WebAssembly anyway. Pretty soon it'll just be a way to deliver QT apps (or some other framework that runs in WebAssembly and…

> If someone launches a new HTML-based Web with crippled javascript (no network comm access, for one, including ability to trigger links or forms), some small, restricted subset of CSS, and much better built-in dynamic table and form elements, I'm there.

Me too. There will be dozens of us.

Re: W3C abandons consensus, standardizes DRM, EFF resigns

#359

Post by wyager »

_dev_pts_0 wrote: post #228
wyager wrote: post #17

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Just because some horrible thing currently happens to exist doesn't mean you need to (explicitly or implicitly) endorse it. We should make implementing DRM as expensive and inconvenient as possible.

Although I share your enthusiasm, I don't think closing the barn door after the horse left is going to help. Customers have to organize and demand an end to DRM by force of withholding money, clicks and eyeballs ... "Power concedes nothing without a demand. It never did and it never will." - Frederick Douglass

I'm not sure what your analogy is supposed to express, but this isn't some ideological stand; it's a simple matter of increasing maintenance costs for DRM software.

Re: W3C abandons consensus, standardizes DRM, EFF resigns

#360

Post by MrMid »

ilikepi wrote: post #27
MrMid wrote: post #9

Doesn't Firefox block DRM content by default? If they continue to do so, and if Chrome does so, then this shouldn't have much effect. If most peoples browsers block it, apps shouldn't use it.

I just created a new Firefox profile (v55.0.3, current stable), and the "Play DRM content" setting is enabled by default. You may be thinking of the Flash plugin, which I believe Firefox and Chrome both do block by default and have done so for a while now.

No, I mean Play DRM content, not Flash plugin. I'm on developer edition though, and it's been a while since I installed it, so I might be wrong. Thanks for your info!
Post reply on HN