21–30 of 424 posts
Sigh. Look, I'm okay with DRM, as long as it works on all my devices. EME won't, under linux, I guarantee the DRM Vendors won't bother releasing Linux binaries. That annoys me.
you should not be okay with DRM. It's as simple as it's: DRM is the form of slavery.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
EME will work on Linux. The thing is, the CDMs with which it is designed to interface won't . It is technically possible to produce a purely FOSS CDM that will compile on pretty much any platform. However that idea has been rejected by content licensees on the grounds that it won't meet requirements, as defined by licence agreements that (so far) no-one is authorised to post on the W3C discussion list. Other ideas th…
I find it somewhat awesome that this whole html drm debacle is effectively what Richard Stallman has been saying for decades versus outdated entrenched old media interests. Except in this case, the web standards consortium is giving away your freedom for you. That is what pisses me off most, really - if big media was left to squalor in broken plugins and horrible drm, which should be horrible because its entirely ant…
The issue of patents in W3C standards came up a decade ago; it looked like the W3C had caved then, but a 'firestorm of public criticism' (to quote an article at the time) caused them to back down.
So, agitate. Tell people about it. Bring it up at user groups. Post to Hacker News :) If you know anyone in tech. journalism, tell them. Support the EFF.
Sigh. Look, I'm okay with DRM, as long as it works on all my devices. EME won't, under linux, I guarantee the DRM Vendors won't bother releasing Linux binaries. That annoys me.
you should not be okay with DRM. It's as simple as it's: DRM is the form of slavery.
Sorry Ivan, but voluntarily agreeing to access encrypted content is not comparable to slavery.
Sigh. Look, I'm okay with DRM, as long as it works on all my devices. EME won't, under linux, I guarantee the DRM Vendors won't bother releasing Linux binaries. That annoys me.
> I'm okay with DRM It seems really defeatist to say this. You are a consumer. You have the ultimate vote on everything, with your wallet, with the only exceptions really being what you need to survive and whatever your government takes. And I don't think netflix is on par with eating. My problem is I have no idea what to do about the w3c. I'd really like to know what alternative network protocols for document render…
Earlier quoted context omitted.
There is no technical reason that DRM technology can't be FOSS and use non-secret keys; this is a result of licensing agreements with content owners. I'm hoping to have those agreements made public so technical discussions surrounding EME can take place with a degree of transparency.
Eh? If your DRM code is FOSS I'm just going to patch it, recompile it, dump out the keys, decrypt my media, and ignore all your constraints. Technical DRM only 'works' when the code is an obfuscated steaming pile and the implementation/platform/hardware tries to make it an incredibly difficult process to mess subvert. Theres never been a consumer-facing DRM technology thats made a lick of sense, and frankly I'm glad…
Personally, I like the idea of copyright bits that travel with content. Some way of telling the user how the creator wishes the content to be used, or not used. Not enforced, mind you (because as you say, that's impossible) but just notified. Making it easier to do the right thing.
That would go well with watermarking to identify paid content, and a good system for processing micropayments.
But of course it's easier just to lobby the W3C and break the Open Web :(
It's worth mentioning that the CEO of the W3C, Jeff Jaffe, is trying to rectify that: http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-restrictedmedia/2...
... but the more I think about it, the more it's scary that things have progressed so far without the requirements being public.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
... but the more I think about it, the more it's scary that things have progressed so far without the requirements being public.
It's not that surprising, given it started off with a proposal of the spec. I mean, it was basically stated that among other things a secure path to the external hardware (like HDCP) was needed, and the actual DRM itself isn't specified anywhere.
The thing that really set off my spidey senses was folks on the list saying "if you have a better idea than EME + CDM, please propose it", then all proposals being shot down.
The whole thing looks rather suspicious to me, hence my attempt to back it up a level of abstraction to the actual requirements.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
> I'm okay with DRM It seems really defeatist to say this. You are a consumer. You have the ultimate vote on everything, with your wallet, with the only exceptions really being what you need to survive and whatever your government takes. And I don't think netflix is on par with eating. My problem is I have no idea what to do about the w3c. I'd really like to know what alternative network protocols for document render…
I'll be honest, I can say that I don't mind it as I rarely consume media that we're discussing. If I do, it's one show rented on my Apple TV, and that's it, maybe once every six months.
It's worth mentioning that the CEO of the W3C, Jeff Jaffe, is trying to rectify that: http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-restrictedmedia/2...
... but the more I think about it, the more it's scary that things have progressed so far without the requirements being public.
In reality these requirements are not set in stone; they are a business negotiation. The first version of iTMS did not meet the record labels' DRM "requirements", but Jobs convinced them that he'd make them enough money to make up for any piracy that iTMS allowed. Likewise Windows XP did not meet Blu-ray's "bag of hurt" robustness requirements but they made an exception because no one was running Vista and Hollywood presumably cared more about their movies being playable on computers than about the piracy that XP would allow. Of course, this doesn't help free software people who aren't willing to negotiate and would be starting from a very weak position even if they were.