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

701–710 of 1001 posts

Re: W3C abandons consensus, standardizes DRM, EFF resigns

#701

Post by nindalf »

josteink wrote: post #677
icebraining wrote: post #334

Earlier quoted context omitted.

In a world where browser manufacturers, as a block, refused to implement DRM, it's seems obvious that sooner or later visual media producers would be forced to the table, to gain access to paying consumers. Doesn't seem obvious to me. Why wouldn't they use their existing native apps?

Netflix, the original HTML DRM-pusher, actually does. For a gazillion kinds of platforms and devices and they're doing fine. In fact it seems they have apps for all platforms out there, except the traditional desktop, something it would cost them almost nothing to provide on top of their existing app-offerings. Basically Netflix is the best proof you have that you don't need DRM in HTML. And yet here we are. It's abs…

So what's the benefit to consumers if streaming services abandon the web? I know of one such service - NowTV, that insisted on me downloading the native app on macOS instead of watching within the browser. Personally I preferred Netflix's browser version, DRM notwithstanding.

DRM is the price that content providers ask of Netflix. Netflix is fine with that, because the alternative is less content. Browser makers are ok with that, because the alternative is fewer people on browsers and more people on native apps. I'm personally ok with that because I dislike installing apps and I prefer the browser, although most people don't have a preference.

Re: W3C abandons consensus, standardizes DRM, EFF resigns

#703

Post by 7952 »

tptacek wrote: post #102
noir_lord wrote: post #88

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The really insane part is that the DRM is pointless anyway, you can go onto any file sharing/streaming site within minutes of a Netflix release dropping and it's there in HD. I still maintain my netflix account 1) because my mum uses it with her Roku and 2) because they should be paid for providing value and good TV. I have the technical skills (like nearly all HN readers I'd imagine) to stream whatever I want with e…

I'm an admirer of well-done DRM technology but I think I agree with the subtext here, which is that DRM doesn't have much of a future. Ironically, the thing that is likely to end DRM is standardized DRM. By making it easier for technology/content companies to deal in premium content, content providers are making it easier to compete with them for their middleman role in funding content.

What annoys me is that DRM could be great for consumer privacy. I could have chat windows that are encrypted streams rendered fully in hardware. There are numerous legitimate reason to want to avoid data being generally accessible. But DRM seems to focus exclusively on content.

Re: W3C abandons consensus, standardizes DRM, EFF resigns

#704

Post by pjmlp »

Crespyl wrote: post #572
icebraining wrote: post #356

Earlier quoted context omitted.

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

Anyone taking bets on how long it will be before CDMs start requiring extensions that allow access to platform Output Protection/HDCP mechanisms? If nothing else, the standard already allows for the CDM to access the network (albeit managed by the user-agent) which means, for example, it could ping Microsoft to ask about this particular Win10 computer (as identified by user agent, IP address, and/or user account data…

Apple and Google also have platform-level frameworks on their OSes.

Re: W3C abandons consensus, standardizes DRM, EFF resigns

#705

Post by isostatic »

jandrese wrote: post #6
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…

This is really the issue. If we could convince media rightsholders that DRM is harmful and unnecessary then all of this heartache wouldn't be necessary. I don't expect this to happen in my lifetime. Any slight glimmer of hope from Apple ditching DRM on iTunes has died as nobody else shows the slightest interest in following their lead.

Didn't I used to be able to buy mp3s from amazon - no DRM? That was before spotify and other streaming solutions of course.

Do people want DRM-free media, or do they want ease of use?

Re: W3C abandons consensus, standardizes DRM, EFF resigns

#706

Post by sasas »

alexasmyths wrote: post #647
sasas wrote: post #629

Earlier quoted context omitted.

How do you prevent someone from capturing their screen and recording a movie? Do you really think it will stop or slow down piracy ? What we do know for certain is it will strip you as a consumer of control over of hardware and software that you purchased.

It's supply and demand. Nothing will stop 'piracy' - noting will stop any crime. Copying DVD's required cost and labour. There's a limit to how much pirating any individual can do. Over the net - it's rather instantaneous. DRM'd content raises the bar beyond most people, so it cuts down on piracy.

> DRM'd content raises the bar beyond most people, so it cuts down on piracy.

All it takes is one individual to make a "DRM" free version of a movie and begin to torrent to the public - and then the bar is lowered to the average consumer / pirate..

Re: W3C abandons consensus, standardizes DRM, EFF resigns

#707

Post by pjmlp »

Iv wrote: post #632
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…

I am bitter that XML/XSLT lost in favor of HTML/CSS. It promised a stricter separation of content and formating and would probably have required less javascript to do the crucial functions. Unfortunately, among the crucial functions nowadays are the silly cosmetics, the parallax scrolling, the animated backgrounds, that allow marketers to pretend to have a website when all they have is formating for zero content. We…

Me too, we have to thank HTML 5 for it.

Yet almost 10 years later, they are still playing catchup with native apps.

Re: W3C abandons consensus, standardizes DRM, EFF resigns

#708

Post by jopsen »

d--b wrote: post #700

What people don't get is that EME sets a strange precedent in the history of HTML. Web browsers have always been very hackable. HTTP meant you could always look at the traffic being exchanged. And because there was little point in obscuring anything, web browsers allowed you to look into and modify everything: - view/modify document source - view/modify DOM - debug script - and so on This is how CSS was defined too.…

HTML have always had plugins too... this ends that.

Think of EME as a slightly better sandboxed plugin with a single very small purposes... As oppose to the security horrors from Flash

Re: W3C abandons consensus, standardizes DRM, EFF resigns

#709

Post by jopsen »

jandrese wrote: post #6
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…

This is really the issue. If we could convince media rightsholders that DRM is harmful and unnecessary then all of this heartache wouldn't be necessary. I don't expect this to happen in my lifetime. Any slight glimmer of hope from Apple ditching DRM on iTunes has died as nobody else shows the slightest interest in following their lead.

We have to forbid DRM by legal means...

Void copyright if DRM is employed, the same way you can have secret parents.

Legal protection shouldn't come without a price.

Re: W3C abandons consensus, standardizes DRM, EFF resigns

#710

Post by near »

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…

The web has been engineered to a complexity level so grossly obscene that it is all but impossible for independent developers to produce fully independent web browsers anymore. You would need hundreds of millions of dollars in capital and strong leadership to produce a browser that would be successful in today's world.

I could dedicate the rest of my life working 100 hours a week on a browser, and I would die before I had something that could compete with browsers of 2017, let alone of the browsers far into the future at my demise. The standards grow in complexity faster than a small team of developers could possibly keep up with.

The best we have are attempts at forks of major browser engines, which will never gain any serious traction to have any power over the direction of web standards.

If people want to do something about it, they need to fork the web itself. HTTP, TLS, HTML, CSS, JS ... the entire stack needs to be scrapped and replaced with something sensible with a focus on simplicity. If a single highly talented developer working full-time can't implement a reasonable browser within a year, then the standard is too complex. This will of course never happen.

And so, on the subject of DRM, we've officially lost the war today. And combined with the impending loss of net neutrality, brace yourselves everyone: it's only going to get worse from here on out.

Post reply on HN