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

591–600 of 1001 posts

Re: W3C abandons consensus, standardizes DRM, EFF resigns

#591

Post by kelnos »

krapp wrote: post #529
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…

>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. No they can't. Physical media is going under. Newspapers and magazines are folding, music is primarily distributed digitally, even TV stations are treating the web as their primary means of content distribution. Media companies have no…

I think you're conflating "the web" with "the internet". Media companies only need the web for discovery; for display they can release native desktop apps, which can even be launched from the web.

I'm not thrilled with DRM in the browser, but at least it's heavily sandboxed, and is way preferable to a series of native apps that get full access to my desktop.

Re: W3C abandons consensus, standardizes DRM, EFF resigns

#592

Post by ac29 »

DrJokepu wrote: post #539
pedrocr wrote: post #374

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I guess Google Chrome on Windows must be a niche thing then. Because that only gets 720p.

> Not possible on any open-source operating system So where do you get more than 720p if you don't get it neither on open source operating systems nor on Chrome on Windows? If you get 720p max everywhere, why do you think this has anything to do with DRM?

Netflix's Windows Store app doesn't have the 720p limitation. I think it may just be a thin shell around Edge, but I'm not 100% sure. It definitely has to do with DRM.

Re: W3C abandons consensus, standardizes DRM, EFF resigns

#593

Post by yakubin »

driverdan wrote: post #585
tptacek wrote: post #28

Earlier quoted context omitted.

It seems self-evidently unharmful, in that we appear to be in a golden era of delivering content online so extraordinary that it threatens traditional television networks. I understand that this is an extremely unpopular sentiment on HN, but here goes: at least with respect to video content, the industry seems to have largely proven DRM concerns unfounded. Update: modulo the Hickson concerns below. Continuing: DRM ce…

It harms anyone who wants to use streaming content offline on devices they control. I often have slow internet access in my home which limits my ability to stream. If I can download when I have a good connection I can view later when my connection goes to shit. This is not an option with most streaming services (eg Netflix). I pay for these services. I should have control of how and when I view the content.

Netflix allows you to download videos. I've watched several episodes of Star Trek on a train this way.

Re: W3C abandons consensus, standardizes DRM, EFF resigns

#594

Post by kelnos »

tveita wrote: post #456
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…

> Media companies couldn't give any less fucks about the web. This is pure bluster. As if they'd just walk away from one of the highest reach distribution platforms and all the money that comes with it just because they were denied a gaping vulnerability surface that provides no benefit for either them or the consumer. Sure, instead of learning the lesson from Spotify they'll just leave pirating as the #1 accessible…

They certainly wouldn't walk away from the web for discovery and advertising, but they can and would easily walk away from it for the last part of distribution: sending you the content bits and having them display on your screen. They don't need the web for that, and they can build a perfectly good experience without it.

Re: W3C abandons consensus, standardizes DRM, EFF resigns

#595

Post by dsacco »

madez wrote: post #590
dsacco wrote: post #576

Earlier quoted context omitted.

That's not axiomatic; in fact, it's a normative claim, not a positive one. The argument is not that there are no consequences, but that DRM is a net positive because those consequences are the trade off for more and better content online. Why don't you clarify why you think the tradeoff is not worth it, instead of just saying DRM = bad?

But the consequences affect everybody, all the time, even those that do not want to watch DRM'ed stuff online. That price is too high.

How do the consequences affect everybody, all the time?

Why is the price too high?

I'm not being obtuse, this is legitimately not obvious to me. Unpack your reasoning a bit, because I still don't see why it's axiomatic that DRM can't be a valuable tradeoff.

Re: W3C abandons consensus, standardizes DRM, EFF resigns

#596

Post by kelnos »

AnthonyMouse wrote: post #544
majormajor wrote: post #505

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Native apps on tablets, phones, and set top boxes are the future (present, really) of that, anyway. Linux users could be a bit more screwed if publishers had to move to Windows/Mac apps if interested in desktop/laptop users, but otherwise it wouldn't be a big impact for the big properties. What's the difference to a user of opening a Netflix app vs going there in the browser? Basically nothing. Do we want apps on the…

> Linux users could be a bit more screwed if publishers had to move to Windows/Mac apps if interested in desktop/laptop users There is not any kind of real difference between not having a native app (or whatever WINE patches are needed to run it) and not having some platform-specific EME black box binary. > What's the difference to a user of opening a Netflix app vs going there in the browser? Basically nothing. For…

> Users balk at installing apps from little known sources

Do they? With the rise of the Mac App Store and whatever similar MS is doing, I doubt they much care.

Re: W3C abandons consensus, standardizes DRM, EFF resigns

#597

Post by imtringued »

Sargos wrote: post #342
syshum wrote: post #318

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I dont think that is true. EME exists because media companies have the strange desire to treat their customers like criminals and Technology companies have the desire to ensure the user can not control the devices they "buy" from them. EME is about control and limiting freedom, not about replacing Flash

What I said is technically true. You are simply talking about conspiracy theories and politics. TV/Movie producers have a legitimate reason to want to protect their media. The lower the bar is for viewing the content they spend lots of money and work producing for free the more people do it. If there were no barriers to viewing movies then there are zero ways in our current economy to get a positive return. You can't…

They already have the most advanced form of DRM possible. Unlike a DVD or BD they can always cancel your account, pull movies from their catalog and dictate from which country you can watch movies. What do they gain from adding clientside DRM? The only thing I can imagine is plugging the analog hole but that is fundamentally impossible. At some point the photons of the screen have to reach your eyes. Even in the worst case scenario you can just use a capture card or even make your own by modding a display with an FPGA. It's futile to try to stop "pirates" with DRM. The only thing you can achieve is imposing even more restraints on your users.

Re: W3C abandons consensus, standardizes DRM, EFF resigns

#598

Post by btown »

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…

> displays DRM content and ignores DRM

Nothing says "attempting to survive as a legitimate corporate entity" like "let's flagrantly violate https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/WIPO_Copyright_and_Performance... ..."

Re: W3C abandons consensus, standardizes DRM, EFF resigns

#599

Post by xvilka »

tdy721 wrote: post #243
bhhaskin wrote: post #33

We are allowing large corporations to dictate and push the web toward a closed system. A future where there has to be an App for that, and if you don't keep your head down you will be censored and cutoff from the rest of the online world.

If you want the masses to care, the masses will have to lose first. They (not hackers) don't get it, and it's inconceivable that they ever will... Until they notice the closed system. Is there even a war taking place? Battles are often forgotten. Yes, we (the hackers) allowed this to happen. We need to think about it now. I feel like the YOU in your comment is slightly misaddressed. What can WE do about it? jus' trol…

Probably it will take a few centuries to realise this, and every single right restriction. People are always bad at protecting their rights.

Re: W3C abandons consensus, standardizes DRM, EFF resigns

#600

Post by dejawu »

> In their public statements about the standard, the W3C executive repeatedly said that they didn't think the DRM advocates would be willing to compromise, and in the absence of such willingness, the exec have given them everything they demanded.

This sentence in particular fills me with rage. These are people and groups who have refused to innovate in the face of the web and have used their clout and momentum to ensure that they never have to again.

So much for the democratization of media the web was supposed to bring. Money still speaks louder than anything else.

Post reply on HN