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

Requirements for DRM in HTML are confidential

lists.w3.org

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

141–150 of 424 posts

Re: Requirements for DRM in HTML are confidential

#141

Post by pepr »

duncan_bayne wrote: post #123
eridius wrote: post #120

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> I just can't believe that Netflix & Co would rather ruin the web People keep repeating this. How is it ruining the web to remove the requirement for crappy (and, at this point, end-of-lifed) browser plugins in order to play Netflix content? The only reason I, and I suspect most people, even bothered to install Silverlight was for Netflix. If I can get a pure HTML5 video-watching experience with no browser plugins,…

But you can't get a pure HTML5 DRM experience! All the HTML5 bit is, is a Javascript API to a CDM decryptor that is every bit as crappy, proprietary, closed-source, insecure and buggy as Flash or Silverlight.

Well, at the very least, it's a smaller piece of code :). (Don't get me wrong, I'm very strongly opposed to DRM and HTML5 DRM in particular.)

Re: Requirements for DRM in HTML are confidential

#142

Post by mcot2 »

If our end result is to see Netflix using HTML5 video on Desktop browsers, how do we get there from a technology and business point of view? Keep in mind that Netflix has content created and owned by the major studios. If any form of DRM is not the way, than what? How do we get to this end goal? Do we make streams 'free' to copy and rely more on the legal system for protection? We are all keen to slam DRM, but what is a viable alternative?

Re: Requirements for DRM in HTML are confidential

#143

Post by darklajid »

shmerl wrote: post #117
simonsarris wrote: post #107

I suppose that the title assertion is to be expected. DRM only works if you don't know how it works. ~~~ I'm not sure I see anything wrong with DRM per se (this could be my fever talking), there are probably good uses I'm too dim to think about, but I do think it's unnecessary as part of the HTML specification. There's no industry or company that has switched to DRM-free content, that I know of, that has failed or su…

Steam can't be considered DRM free in many cases, for example because they don't let you backing up installers / packages, so if the service closes down you lose your collection. The only completely DRM-free gaming distributor is GOG. Humble Bundle and Desura are mixed. You are right in general though. Going DRM free not only won't hurt any publisher, it will only gain respect from customers and will improve the qual…

Can you explain the "no backups" part? I'm sure you know about the backups you can create in Steam itself, bundling the application. What is the missing detail? Being unable to extract the data again, without Steam? Is Steam unable to restore these bundles in offline mode?

Re: Requirements for DRM in HTML are confidential

#144

Post by crowleysimon »

darklajid wrote: post #143
shmerl wrote: post #117

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Steam can't be considered DRM free in many cases, for example because they don't let you backing up installers / packages, so if the service closes down you lose your collection. The only completely DRM-free gaming distributor is GOG. Humble Bundle and Desura are mixed. You are right in general though. Going DRM free not only won't hurt any publisher, it will only gain respect from customers and will improve the qual…

Can you explain the "no backups" part? I'm sure you know about the backups you can create in Steam itself, bundling the application. What is the missing detail? Being unable to extract the data again, without Steam? Is Steam unable to restore these bundles in offline mode?

Correct. You can backup a game when offline, but steam wont allow you to restore one without being logged in.

Re: Requirements for DRM in HTML are confidential

#145

Post by nemothekid »

byuu wrote: post #94
Nursie wrote: post #69

Great. DRM. The best example of shooting yourself in the foot ever. Give customers encrypted content and the keys, try to prevent them from freely using the two together, undermine copyright fair use and first sale doctrines as you go along. Intended effect - No Piracy Actual effect - Paying customers get crippled products, pirates carry on regardless It's crazy. And the more they try to lock it down the worse their…

The DRM is becoming increasingly complex and elaborate, and taking longer and longer to fully crack. Compare PS2 to PS3 crack times, for instance. The media executives are of the firm belief that unbreakable DRM is just around the corner, and that when they reach it, piracy will end and they can go back to charging whatever they want again. A return to the good old days of $25 CDs for one song you like and eight fill…

The PS3 only went uncracked for so long because Sony offered the option to install Linux on the PS3. Once Sony removed that option the people with the smarts to crack the PS3 did so. Once a magnifying glass was put under the PS3 it turned out that the "DRM" was actually horribly implemented (like Rand() functions that were essentially returning constants).

http://www.youtube.com/watch?feature=player_detailpage&v=4lo...

Re: Requirements for DRM in HTML are confidential

#146

Post by marcus_holmes »

byuu wrote: post #94
Nursie wrote: post #69

Great. DRM. The best example of shooting yourself in the foot ever. Give customers encrypted content and the keys, try to prevent them from freely using the two together, undermine copyright fair use and first sale doctrines as you go along. Intended effect - No Piracy Actual effect - Paying customers get crippled products, pirates carry on regardless It's crazy. And the more they try to lock it down the worse their…

The DRM is becoming increasingly complex and elaborate, and taking longer and longer to fully crack. Compare PS2 to PS3 crack times, for instance. The media executives are of the firm belief that unbreakable DRM is just around the corner, and that when they reach it, piracy will end and they can go back to charging whatever they want again. A return to the good old days of $25 CDs for one song you like and eight fill…

I think most pirates will tolerate a bit of quality loss if it saves them heaps of cash.

From the studies done, piracy is not about cash, it's about convenience, freedom, etc. If the studios released the content for free (as in beer) but DRM-encumbered then pirates would still be removing the DRM.

Re: Requirements for DRM in HTML are confidential

#147

Post by ekianjo »

darklajid wrote: post #143
shmerl wrote: post #117

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Steam can't be considered DRM free in many cases, for example because they don't let you backing up installers / packages, so if the service closes down you lose your collection. The only completely DRM-free gaming distributor is GOG. Humble Bundle and Desura are mixed. You are right in general though. Going DRM free not only won't hurt any publisher, it will only gain respect from customers and will improve the qual…

Can you explain the "no backups" part? I'm sure you know about the backups you can create in Steam itself, bundling the application. What is the missing detail? Being unable to extract the data again, without Steam? Is Steam unable to restore these bundles in offline mode?

Steam will require you to be connected to their servers once in a while at least. There's no pure offline mode.

Re: Requirements for DRM in HTML are confidential

#148

Post by tzs »

simonsarris wrote: post #107

I suppose that the title assertion is to be expected. DRM only works if you don't know how it works. ~~~ I'm not sure I see anything wrong with DRM per se (this could be my fever talking), there are probably good uses I'm too dim to think about, but I do think it's unnecessary as part of the HTML specification. There's no industry or company that has switched to DRM-free content, that I know of, that has failed or su…

> Music is largely available DRM-free now, thanks to Amazon's MP3 store (at the least, I'm sure there are others)

Apple should get significant credit here. It was Steve Jobs' open letter of 2007-02-06 to the big four labels calling for them to go DRM free that got the ball rolling. EMI agreed, and Apple started selling DRM-free tracks from them on 2007-05-27.

Amazon's public beta of their MP3 store launched on 2007-09-25, four months after Apple had started selling DRM-free music. Amazon was the first to get contracts in place with all four major labels for DRM-free music.

Re: Requirements for DRM in HTML are confidential

#149

Post by onion2k »

mcot2 wrote: post #142

If our end result is to see Netflix using HTML5 video on Desktop browsers, how do we get there from a technology and business point of view? Keep in mind that Netflix has content created and owned by the major studios. If any form of DRM is not the way, than what? How do we get to this end goal? Do we make streams 'free' to copy and rely more on the legal system for protection? We are all keen to slam DRM, but what i…

There is no reason why the free and open standards of the internet should be compromised so that a particular business can operate on it. If DRM-free HTML video makes it so that Netflix can't develop a browser based viewer, so be it. The internet is bigger, and considerably more important, than streaming movies.

Re: Requirements for DRM in HTML are confidential

#150

Post by IanCal »

krasin wrote: post #66
hbags wrote: post #23

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> 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.

first of all, I agree that my message was too short and didn't have any arguments to positively contribute to the thread. Sorry about that. Now, let me explain how did I come to this comparison (even if it seems rogue). To make it more specific, let's consider Raspberry Pi, which is one of the most open ARM boards and, at the same time, practices DRM. For example, its hardware video decoding capabilities might be unl…

> For example, its hardware video decoding capabilities might be unlocked, if a separate digital license is acquired in the store [1].

One particular format. It'll do h264 fine, it's only MPEG-2 that it won't do in hardware unless you buy a license.

> Effectively, even if the user does not want to access an encrypted content or use the "premium" functionality, he is being kept in a jail to make sure this premium stuff is not used.

Effectively kept in a jail? I've got a raspberry pi in the corner of the room, I still seem to be able to leave. This is identical to any service with a premium.

> 1. The customers are treated as property to be sold or rented.

With slavery, people are actually bought and sold. They then belong to someone else. When you watch a video with DRM you just can't copy it.

> 1. The customers are treated as property to be sold or rented. There're video dongles/boxes on the market which stream content to the TV.

Wait, are you saying that it's slavery for the dongles?

> The manufacturers of this devices may actually sell the access to the users of this device to the content providers.

In the same way that the newspapers do, but I wouldn't say when I'm reading the paper I'm being sold into slavery.

> 2. The customers may be shown ads against their will

In return for watching the programme. That part is key. If we were being held down and forced to watch it, then I'd agree more but you aren't. It's just part of the transaction.

Post reply on HN