I tried creating a web browser, and Google blocked me • Hacker News Board

Re: I tried creating a web browser, and Google blocked me

#381

Post by janoc » Tue, Apr 02, 2019, 7:32 PM UTC

the8472 wrote: post #334

krzyk wrote: post #277

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The above is most probably for US based clients. E.g. in Poland it is perfectly legal to watch copyrighted material as long as you don't redistribute it. It is also legal to do a reverse engineering of software to allow it to run on your system, software, hardware (so I think a browser also applies). (I'm not a lawyer, just reading some of the more technical law articles)

Poland is an EU member, so your government must have some implementation of the EU Copyright directive, which includes somewhat similar anti-circumvention clauses as the DMCA[0]. There are lots of differences in the details, but I wouldn't make a blanket statement that it's completely legal without actually checking the corresponding laws. [0] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Copyright_Directive#Technologi...

You need to realize that the EU "directives" are not actually the law (aka the thing that will get you prosecuted).

The directives are "transposed" into national law, country by country - and each country can (and does) add a local "flavor" to it. So if the Poles have watered down the anti-circumvention clause (it is very vague in the directive, giving a ton of maneuvering space to the national parliaments), the situation he is describing is very possible. On the opposite side of the spectrum is traditionally France, with its (fortunately incredibly ineffective) three strike system. Very different approaches to things even though both countries are implementing the same copyright directive.

The other type of texts coming from Brussels are "regulations" - those go into effect immediately, without having to be rewritten into national laws. GDPR is an example of such regulation.

Re: I tried creating a web browser, and Google blocked me

#382

Post by burtonator » Tue, Apr 02, 2019, 7:32 PM UTC

I had a similar response when developing Polar but for Electron and the MS app store.

I write a few posts about it here:

https://getpolarized.io/2019/02/13/microsoft-blocking-electr...

https://getpolarized.io/2019/02/28/dear-app-stores-dont-bloc...

It took me four weeks to unblock me and I finally had a chance to re-publish to the MS app store and I'm waiting for their final approval of my app.

YES.. I can develop the app without being in an app store , but my distribution will be dramatically reduced.

Doesn't make sense to have an app with no users.

Google is probably not actually targeting this app specifically just that they've been insanely incompetent lately and screwing over developers ALL over the ecosystem including Android, Chrome Extensions, etc.

Our chrome extension continues to need approval every time we publish it EVEN if we just update the assets/images.

Google is really dropping the ball and pissing off developers left and right.

Over at /r/androiddev people are actually talking about protests at Google IO...

Re: I tried creating a web browser, and Google blocked me

#383

Post by imtringued » Tue, Apr 02, 2019, 7:33 PM UTC

akhilcacharya wrote: post #32

johndavidback wrote: post #13

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Yes - reading the post it appears OP's specific value proposition is keeping DRM'd videos in sync. This reminds me of watching Dawson's Creek with my girlfriend in 8th grade - we'd call eachother on the phone and watch the show at the same time. Anyway this would be the browser version of that, from what I understand.

The hack some people have is to just stream the browser . I do that sometimes using Parsec and it works reasonably with GPU hardware encoding.

Why bother with parsec when rabb.it exists?

Re: I tried creating a web browser, and Google blocked me

#384

Post by akhilcacharya » Tue, Apr 02, 2019, 7:37 PM UTC

imtringued wrote: post #383

akhilcacharya wrote: post #32

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The hack some people have is to just stream the browser . I do that sometimes using Parsec and it works reasonably with GPU hardware encoding.

Why bother with parsec when rabb.it exists?

I used Rabbit quite a bit but latency has gotten really bad lately. The hardware acceleration and my solid upload pipe makes parsec significantly better to use.

Re: I tried creating a web browser, and Google blocked me

#385

Post by jedberg » Tue, Apr 02, 2019, 7:37 PM UTC

throwaway2048 wrote: post #372

jedberg wrote: post #331

Earlier quoted context omitted.

It’s very rare. I’ll bet you can’t name a single show that Netflix produces. Remember all those big name shows are produced by other people and then sold exclusively to Netflix. DRM does not benefit Netflix. It’s complicated and takes a lot of resources to run. They’d much rather not have to deal with it at all. Having DRM does not gain them any customers — in fact it loses them some. But it’s the only way they can g…

If Netflix is paying for shows that are produced, and they have exclusive rights, they can attach any distribution terms they want to them. You can't tell me with a straight face that somehow they don't have this power. DRM absolutely benefits them because it ensures that only parties they permit are allowed to access content, for the same reason it benefits other media companies.

> DRM absolutely benefits them because it ensures that only parties they permit are allowed to access content, for the same reason it benefits other media companies

The fact that every pi8ece of Netflix content is on the pirate sites within hours of release would prove otherwise. Netflix is well aware of the uselessness of DRM.

And you're right, they probably did negotiate DRM free licenses. But you missed the other part of my post -- the cost for implementing a separate DRM free pipeline was very high, and there would be little ROI to the business. Not having DRM on just the Netflix content would get very few new customers, if any. How many people would say "man I would totally sign up for Netflix if only their own content was DRM free, even though I'd need a DRM enabled player to play everything else, and oh yeah this only applies to web streaming anyway."

Re: I tried creating a web browser, and Google blocked me

#386

Post by yason » Tue, Apr 02, 2019, 7:38 PM UTC

I would assume Google would not even be allowed to let third-party developers use their DRM implementation even if they wanted to. The real stakeholders would grumble a stern no. If this is true the real fix would be to patch the copyright law, IP licensing, and the contracts with content producers.

Re: I tried creating a web browser, and Google blocked me

#387

Post by radisb » Tue, Apr 02, 2019, 7:38 PM UTC

fixermark wrote: post #278

bad_user wrote: post #259

Earlier quoted context omitted.

This argument is repeated ad nauseam but it’s false, all it takes is a torrenting app installed, that’s the only threshold. But back to the point, if Netflix wouldn’t use DRM, it would change absolutely nothing since copyright infringement is still illegal and those DRM protections are completely useless.

Can my torrenting app stream my video, or do I have to wait for a full assembly of the pieces from torrent hosts and enough downloaded to watch it? If the latter, torrenting is plenty cumbersome enough that if the studios are pushing movie-viewing to "Pay us money or you have to torrent it," they're winning.

Pop-Corn Time would like to have a word with you

Re: I tried creating a web browser, and Google blocked me

#388

Post by jedberg » Tue, Apr 02, 2019, 7:39 PM UTC

0815test wrote: post #356

jedberg wrote: post #331

Earlier quoted context omitted.

It’s very rare. I’ll bet you can’t name a single show that Netflix produces. Remember all those big name shows are produced by other people and then sold exclusively to Netflix. DRM does not benefit Netflix. It’s complicated and takes a lot of resources to run. They’d much rather not have to deal with it at all. Having DRM does not gain them any customers — in fact it loses them some. But it’s the only way they can g…

Come on, that can't possibly be right. If they can get shows sold "exclusively" to them, why can't they get shows sold to them without DRM requirements? (The closest I can get to an explanation is that the "exclusivity" deal might be limited to online streaming platforms only , and whoever is selling the content still worries about everything else. But streaming is a significant and growing portion of all media consu…

They probably did negotiate DRM free licenses. But the cost for implementing a separate DRM free pipeline is very high, and there would be little ROI to the business. Not having DRM on just the Netflix content would get very few new customers, if any, especially given that this whole argument only applies to web streaming anyway.

Re: I tried creating a web browser, and Google blocked me

#389

Post by radisb » Tue, Apr 02, 2019, 7:41 PM UTC

Cyph0n wrote: post #368

simias wrote: post #351

Earlier quoted context omitted.

My point was that, for movies and TV shows at least, this simply doesn't work. The delay is small enough that it's usually negligible (a few hours in my experience). For live events (especially sporting events) of course that's enough to make pirating impractical, but for the new episode of Game of Thrones it's really not much. Furthermore I assume that most of that latency is not due to the time required for pirates…

> For live events (especially sporting events) of course that's enough to make pirating impractical, but for the new episode of Game of Thrones it's really not much. I think you underestimate how many people prefer to watch the latest episode as it airs. > not due to the time required for pirates to break the DRM Even if the DRM is already broken, you can't just ignore the initial time spent to break it. > until it r…

Isn't it still live and well?

Re: I tried creating a web browser, and Google blocked me

#390

Post by fixermark » Tue, Apr 02, 2019, 7:46 PM UTC

radisb wrote: post #387

fixermark wrote: post #278

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Can my torrenting app stream my video, or do I have to wait for a full assembly of the pieces from torrent hosts and enough downloaded to watch it? If the latter, torrenting is plenty cumbersome enough that if the studios are pushing movie-viewing to "Pay us money or you have to torrent it," they're winning.

Pop-Corn Time would like to have a word with you

I don't think it would, unless it begins playing within thirty seconds of the user choosing a video and provides an uninterrupted streaming experience?

Last I checked, the BitTorrent protocol didn't provide packet sorting that would allow for this behavior (by forcing the beginning of the movie's bytestream to be the first data downloaded), so my mistake if the protocol has improved and I was unaware it provided this service.