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

381–390 of 1001 posts

Re: W3C abandons consensus, standardizes DRM, EFF resigns

#381

Post by camus2 »

wakamoleguy wrote: post #345
zymhan wrote: post #271

Earlier quoted context omitted.

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

If DRM has already existed for years, and the majority of browsers have already accepted EME as a de facto standard by implementing it, wouldn't codifying that standard be positive?

It's like arguing that Flash is a standard because the majority of browsers supported it. DRM isn't the open web and should have nothing to do with the W3C. You want to force DRM onto your users? write a native app.

Re: W3C abandons consensus, standardizes DRM, EFF resigns

#382

Post by appleflaxen »

untog wrote: post #250
wolfgke wrote: post #219

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> Mozilla ended up accepting EME in 2014, because otherwise it would have become "the browser where you cannot see videos" Rather: "the browser where you cannot see DRM-infected video" - which is an active protection of the user against malware.

...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.

that's the whole point: if your product is so amazing that your users will do that, then it's great! but those of us who are NOT your customers will be able to exist without the attack surface on our machine.

Re: W3C abandons consensus, standardizes DRM, EFF resigns

#383

Post by justonepost »

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…

It's just another chip in our ability to own things. It just another way tha makes us more beholden to our digital landlords. This lawyer explains it best: http://www.newsweek.com/silicon-valley-private-property-and-...

Re: W3C abandons consensus, standardizes DRM, EFF resigns

#384

Post by mozumder »

anonacct37 wrote: post #358
ashark wrote: post #327

Earlier quoted context omitted.

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.

getting a little optimistic there...

Re: W3C abandons consensus, standardizes DRM, EFF resigns

#386

Post by khedoros1 »

epistasis wrote: post #110
wolfgke wrote: post #85

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> What's going to happen without a standard? A bunch of proprietary plugins? What is supposed to be happen is a zero-tolerance and active fightback against anything DRM-related in the web - be it in the browser or be it a plugin.

That's a big shift from historical standards. Where has the pushback been for plugins that permitted DRM? Or from allowing them in, say Firefox? I'm wondering why this proposal gets so much more attention than all the past DRM that's been on the web. Did people just not realize that it was there?

Flash and Silverlight DRM (as an example of 2) weren't previously web standards, and even the 3rd party plugins that included them had significant non-DRM-related uses.

This is a different animal: Adding standardized interfaces to browsers specifically designed to talk to dedicated DRM modules.

Re: W3C abandons consensus, standardizes DRM, EFF resigns

#387

Post by justonepost »

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…

It's digital serfdom, pure and simple. Rather than letting us own, they want us to pay rent. It's the electronic feudal lords looking out for one another. This lawyer explains it well: http://www.newsweek.com/silicon-valley-private-property-and-...

Re: W3C abandons consensus, standardizes DRM, EFF resigns

#388

Post by ori_b »

throwaway34241 wrote: post #238
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…

Do you have any evidence or reason to believe there is actual corruption on the committee (aside from them making a decision you disagree with)? I suspect I agree with you on DRM but this style of debate, where there is no attempt to argue or explain the issue, and the first line of argument is personal attacks or denigrating anyone with an opposing viewpoint, is depressing. Consider that accusing climate scientists…

No, it's probably not intentional corruption and malice. Just a belief that users are getting more of what they want as passive consumers paying large companies for services, rather than as creators in a peer to peer web. Realistically, they're likely to be right.

Re: W3C abandons consensus, standardizes DRM, EFF resigns

#389

Post by lern_too_spel »

appleflaxen wrote: post #377
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…

let them go, and take their drivel with them. if they want DRM, let them convince their own customers; just leave it off my machine.

There are multiple open source web browsers. You are free to install one without DRM and free to visit websites that don't need that feature. What changes for you just because there is a standard?

Re: W3C abandons consensus, standardizes DRM, EFF resigns

#390

Post by superflyguy »

Oxxide wrote: post #348
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…

The fun thing about DRM, is that people love to defeat it. They (the general public AND 3DM, to TorrentFreak, bunch of whiners IMO) said Denuvo was the death of cracking and piracy. 3DM: No games crackable in 2 years time, said the headline. now the cracking scene, which was mostly dying, has seen some revival. It has adapted, but it's a slow moving ship. Now a new generation (or the older generation, who knows, I'm…

"No games crackable in 2 years time, said the headline...now the cracking scene, which was mostly dying, has seen some revival"

Do you have a citation for this? Every game, dvd, stream, book etc ever has been cracked. Software protection has a 0% success rate.

Post reply on HN