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

471–480 of 1001 posts

Re: W3C abandons consensus, standardizes DRM, EFF resigns

#471

Post by Anthony-G »

superflyguy wrote: post #390
Oxxide wrote: post #348

Earlier quoted context omitted.

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.

Oxxide is actually arguing against this headline: https://torrentfreak.com/no-more-pirate-games-in-two-years-g...

Re: W3C abandons consensus, standardizes DRM, EFF resigns

#472

Post by Taek »

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…

Count me in. And count my web server in as well, we'd make sure all pages are compatible.

Your computer belongs to you. I'm ready to escape the cycle of 'oh they own everything because they snuck human rights violations into their software and hardware and nobody stopped them'.

Re: W3C abandons consensus, standardizes DRM, EFF resigns

#473

Post by yosito »

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…

It's not a technical problem. It's a political problem. Those with the means will seek to control the web, no matter what technical solutions are invented to keep it open. Preventing tyrannical control of the web is an endless struggle.

Re: W3C abandons consensus, standardizes DRM, EFF resigns

#474

Post by rotrux »

kerkeslager wrote: post #423
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…

Ultimately, I think the failure of the open web runs deeper than that. When I visit, for example, a cookbook website, when I view a recipe, the problem isn't just that the site can run arbitrary scripts on my computer. It's also that I have no control over how that recipe displays because so much of that display is in HTML. I can't pull it into a useful format and store it with all my other recipes because it's in HT…

Oh but don't worry! As soon as someone breaks www.cookbooksRus.com's "Encrypted Media Extensions," you or someone totally benevolent will be able to help render ANYONE's www.cookbooksRus.com browser-experience! Server-protection isn't always a 0-sum game against client-protection, but in this case it totally is.

Re: W3C abandons consensus, standardizes DRM, EFF resigns

#475

Post by eof »

gtirloni wrote: post #450
eof wrote: post #439

Earlier quoted context omitted.

As a follow up, isn't all this DRM for naught? If you send the video and the audio to my computer, I can record it after it's decrypted. What problem does this really solve? I already use netflix/amazon because it's more convenient than torrenting, unless it isn't. Seems the possibility is nil DRM-free versions of DRM content won't be available anyway.

You're right, content will always be pirated. However, security and rights management is never about definitive solutions. DRM makes it hard for 99% of the people and that's enough for copyright holders. They can focus their resources on the other 1% (unfortunately including poeple with legitimate reasons). I'm not agreeing with this but it's how it is and I don't see that changing. I agree with another commenter tha…

> DRM makes it hard for 99% of the people

Does it though? I mean, there are already non-drm versions available, and have been "forever". Yet 99% of people still choose netflix because it's easier. Even the 1% choose netflix because it is easier.

How does restricting the delivery of legitimate/legal content impact the way that people consume illegitimate/illegal content?

I also don't see it changing, but it seems like it will have /obviously/ literally zero impact on the availability of pirated content, and how/if people use pirated content.

Re: W3C abandons consensus, standardizes DRM, EFF resigns

#476

Post by AnthonyMouse »

lern_too_spel wrote: post #467
AnthonyMouse wrote: post #422

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Websites that otherwise wouldn't have used DRM start to use it, that's what changes.

If you can point to one example of a website that implements DRM that otherwise wouldn't have, I'll buy this argument. On the other side, I can point to many websites that removed Flash/Silverlight/other security nightmare plugins after implementing EME.

> If you can point to one example of a website that implements DRM that otherwise wouldn't have, I'll buy this argument.

The argument that some companies will avoid things their customers hate seems illogical, but you'll believe me if I provide an anecdote?

> On the other side, I can point to many websites that removed Flash/Silverlight/other security nightmare plugins after implementing EME.

Which is irrelevant because it has had a long known solution: Only install terrible plugins in a virtual machine, or if you're paranoid on a separate physical machine (a used PC capable of playing HD video is And yes, that is an inconvenience, which is a feature, because DRM should be as inconvenient as possible. So that fewer people will use it.

Re: W3C abandons consensus, standardizes DRM, EFF resigns

#477

Post by objclxt »

civilian wrote: post #446
objclxt wrote: post #276

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> 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…

Market share isn't immutable! Market share changes based on capabilities. I dropped IE for FF when I got a basic understanding of computers, I dropped FF when it became clear it was a memory hog, and now I kind of toggle between Chrome and FF. I think that, with killer features like breaking out of DRM, the market share could change.

> I think that, with killer features like breaking out of DRM, the market share could change.

That's not a killer feature to the market: I bet 99/100 people don't know what DRM is or what it stands for. They just care that they can watch videos or not.

For better or the worse the overwhelming majority of browser users don't know, care, or have any idea about how the internet is standardized, how DRM works, and why it matters to them.

Re: W3C abandons consensus, standardizes DRM, EFF resigns

#478

Post by cesarb »

pdonis wrote: post #61
2trill2spill wrote: post #42

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Hogwash, there is more open source software now then ever before.

What's important is not what software exists somewhere where somebody could theoretically download and use it, but what software actually gets used. Most users don't even know what open source software is, much less where to find any; they use what comes with either Windows or OS X or their smartphone. Also, your software can be as open source as you like, but if it can't interoperate with the rest of the Internet, i…

> But I would care very much if, for example, my bank's website started requiring a DRM-capable browser.

That already is the case for banks which use gbplugin. You have to use that closed-source component, or the online banking website won't even let you login. And it's invasive; I have seen reports of it slowing down the whole computer, conflicting with a Windows update (http://www.linhadefensiva.org/2013/04/teste-mostra-incompati...), and disabling IPv6 (http://ipv6.br/post/bug-em-plugin-de-seguranca-de-bancos-blo...). For a while, it wasn't even available for Linux, so you had to use Windows.

Re: W3C abandons consensus, standardizes DRM, EFF resigns

#479

Post by saganus »

tdy721 wrote: post #273
saganus wrote: post #98

Earlier quoted context omitted.

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

Yeah, maybe.

But I think it's still a possibility. Never underestimate companies that want to "innovate".

I mean, standardizing a DRM API on browsers is probably going to bring us a lot of new "tools" which people will try to use for a lot of different things, and I can very easily imagine they will explore the possibility of paywalls and such.

Not saying you are wrong, just saying that sometimes layers don't seem to be as separate as we engineers would like them to be.

Re: W3C abandons consensus, standardizes DRM, EFF resigns

#480

Post by [deleted] »

zymhan wrote: post #271
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.

[deleted]
Post reply on HN