Requirements for DRM in HTML are confidential

Post by duncan_bayne » Tue, Jan 14, 2014, 9:22 AM UTC

mcot2 wrote: post #138

duncan_bayne wrote: post #99

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Oh yeah, and in terms of being a purist - the company I co-founded produced a DRM system for Windows software. It's still in use, and I still make money from feature enhancements and bugfixes to it. So please don't (like a few on the W3 list) paint me as some sort of anticapitalist hippie tinfoil-hat wearer. I know a fair bit about DRM myself, which is why I say it has no place in the W3C or the Open Web.

We have basically two options here. DRM for video and audio streams will be introduced by each browser vendor separately, or we have some kind of standard. I would rather see a standards based approach... This is reality . The merits of DRM really have nothing to do with this discussion.

Post by duncan_bayne » Tue, Jan 14, 2014, 9:24 AM UTC

pepr wrote: post #141

duncan_bayne wrote: post #123

Earlier quoted context omitted.

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.)

Post by Already__Taken » Tue, Jan 14, 2014, 9:24 AM UTC

duncan_bayne wrote: post #124

pdkl95 wrote: post #111

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> they are a business negotiation. The fact that you (and others, obviously) think of this as a "business negotiation" is part of the problem. Many of us see Free {Software,Standards} as necessary for a free society, and as such should be considered some kind of "right" similar to those listed in the 1st Amendment. The idea that we should "negotiate" away those rights is obviously not something that will be taken ser…

And only a subset of movies, don't forget: big-money blockbusters. That's the only sort which depend upon the business model 'big media' is trying to protect with DRM.

Post by dogweather » Tue, Jan 14, 2014, 9:26 AM UTC

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…

Post by watwut » Tue, Jan 14, 2014, 9:27 AM UTC

mcot2 wrote: post #136

duncan_bayne wrote: post #75

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Because those purists - and I'm one - care very deeply about the principles of the Open Web, the very principles that are touted on the W3C website itself. The fundamental issue is this: up until now, anyone with the will to do so and a general purpose computer could build a browser that could display all the content on a W3C-standards-compliant website. If EME + CDM are endorsed, then that will no longer be true. Th…

I don't even understand what the term "Open Web" even means. I don't see how driving video on the web away from flash and onto a standardized system is against the principals of openness, even if DRM is a requirement for content creators.