Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

EFF Makes Formal Objection to DRM in HTML5

eff.org

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

21–30 of 280 posts

Re: EFF Makes Formal Objection to DRM in HTML5

#21

Post by chris_mahan »

kunai wrote: post #17
chris_mahan wrote: post #13

when I first heard of DRM in HTML5, the first thing that came to mind was that web apps would be encrypted, and that the only interface people would have would be mouse or touch. This would essentially make the web like blue-ray: great for consuming content and playing scripted games, and not-so-great for everyone else. Also, how long before "safe" browsers only allowed drm-encrypted web apps, to "protect consumers"?…

...what? That would be quite ridiculous. And the "safe" browser thing will never happen, so long as open-source is alive. Nobody can control the Web. The W3C is forgetting that.

What if netflix released its own browser, perhaps a fork of chromium, and all it could do was go to netflix and other such approved (read: drm-ready) sites that paid a fee to netflix?

And what if parents made that the default browser on the device? To protect the kids, of course.

Of course.

Re: EFF Makes Formal Objection to DRM in HTML5

#22

Post by chris_mahan »

ivanca wrote: post #19
chris_mahan wrote: post #13

when I first heard of DRM in HTML5, the first thing that came to mind was that web apps would be encrypted, and that the only interface people would have would be mouse or touch. This would essentially make the web like blue-ray: great for consuming content and playing scripted games, and not-so-great for everyone else. Also, how long before "safe" browsers only allowed drm-encrypted web apps, to "protect consumers"?…

That's the only natural evolution; for example the news sites will say: "Why the movie industry have protection but we don't? We need HTML5 DRM in our writings, is our copyright less important than theirs? I say no sir!" And slowly an internet where you can't use browser extensions, where you can't copy anything you read, where you depend on the existence of a company, a functional internet connection to play (just o…

News sites would be all over that. Gaming websites too. Sports websites I imagine...

Re: EFF Makes Formal Objection to DRM in HTML5

#23

Post by ivanca »

walid wrote: post #20

The way I see it is if DRM is going to be managed in Firefox and Chrome then it wouldn't necessarily block a determined person from circumventing it. Both browsers are open source. HTML5 DRM will only stop people from using regular copy/paste. I have a feeling that the EFF is over-reacting, but only time will tell what the right action should have been.

Yeah, only time will tell us if watching sitcoms on the browser is really worth to lose an open internet.

Re: EFF Makes Formal Objection to DRM in HTML5

#24

Post by yzhengyu »

bitwize wrote: post #4

The Web is going to get DRM one way or another. Now we can do this the easy way, with standards that are agreed upon across vendors -- or the hard way, with proprietary plug-ins that only work in Windows and Internet Explorer.

I am skeptical of any value in having "standards" agreed for this for consumers which would be any different from having third party plugins.

If you want your content to be protected, fine, you can go back to using third party plugins. Then users will have a clear choice on whether to consume your content.

Re: EFF Makes Formal Objection to DRM in HTML5

#25

Post by rgovostes »

chris_mahan wrote: post #21
kunai wrote: post #17

Earlier quoted context omitted.

...what? That would be quite ridiculous. And the "safe" browser thing will never happen, so long as open-source is alive. Nobody can control the Web. The W3C is forgetting that.

What if netflix released its own browser, perhaps a fork of chromium, and all it could do was go to netflix and other such approved (read: drm-ready) sites that paid a fee to netflix? And what if parents made that the default browser on the device? To protect the kids, of course. Of course.

What prevents that with or without DRM in HTML5?

Re: EFF Makes Formal Objection to DRM in HTML5

#26

Post by betterunix »

kunai wrote: post #17
chris_mahan wrote: post #13

when I first heard of DRM in HTML5, the first thing that came to mind was that web apps would be encrypted, and that the only interface people would have would be mouse or touch. This would essentially make the web like blue-ray: great for consuming content and playing scripted games, and not-so-great for everyone else. Also, how long before "safe" browsers only allowed drm-encrypted web apps, to "protect consumers"?…

...what? That would be quite ridiculous. And the "safe" browser thing will never happen, so long as open-source is alive. Nobody can control the Web. The W3C is forgetting that.

"the "safe" browser thing will never happen, so long as open-source is alive"

So people who choose to use only free software will be excluded from large parts of the web. How is that a good outcome?

Re: EFF Makes Formal Objection to DRM in HTML5

#27

Post by belorn »

bitwize wrote: post #4

The Web is going to get DRM one way or another. Now we can do this the easy way, with standards that are agreed upon across vendors -- or the hard way, with proprietary plug-ins that only work in Windows and Internet Explorer.

DRM: Software with the intent to take control with force over someones else computer.

Sorry but there is nothing intrinsic valuable about DRM in the web, in the exact same way that any other form of malware is not intrinsic valuable to the web. Just because its current legal to offer media products with malware embedded, doesn't make it a logical choice to include in a web standard that describes an open web of cooperating nodes.

Re: EFF Makes Formal Objection to DRM in HTML5

#28

Post by duncan_bayne »

bitwize wrote: post #4

The Web is going to get DRM one way or another. Now we can do this the easy way, with standards that are agreed upon across vendors -- or the hard way, with proprietary plug-ins that only work in Windows and Internet Explorer.

The EME proposal by the W3C is specifically intended to enable just what you describe: proprietary plug-ins that only work in particular browsers.

One of the primary sponsors of the EME proposal is Netflix, who are already building exactly what you describe.

I've addressed this issue - a misconception that at least some on the W3C hold - in detail here:

http://www.w3.org/QA/2013/05/perspectives_on_encrypted_medi....

Re: EFF Makes Formal Objection to DRM in HTML5

#29

Post by mey »

chris_mahan wrote: post #21
kunai wrote: post #17

Earlier quoted context omitted.

...what? That would be quite ridiculous. And the "safe" browser thing will never happen, so long as open-source is alive. Nobody can control the Web. The W3C is forgetting that.

What if netflix released its own browser, perhaps a fork of chromium, and all it could do was go to netflix and other such approved (read: drm-ready) sites that paid a fee to netflix? And what if parents made that the default browser on the device? To protect the kids, of course. Of course.

How is that different then the Windows 8/Android/iOS/Xbox 360/Wii/PS3 netflix applications?

Re: EFF Makes Formal Objection to DRM in HTML5

#30

Post by chris_mahan »

rgovostes wrote: post #25
chris_mahan wrote: post #21

Earlier quoted context omitted.

What if netflix released its own browser, perhaps a fork of chromium, and all it could do was go to netflix and other such approved (read: drm-ready) sites that paid a fee to netflix? And what if parents made that the default browser on the device? To protect the kids, of course. Of course.

What prevents that with or without DRM in HTML5?

Well, they could say: "Download NetFlixBrowser! The fastest, safest HTML5 Browser on the planet!"
Post reply on HN