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

221–230 of 424 posts

Re: Requirements for DRM in HTML are confidential

#221

Post by duncan_bayne »

shmerl wrote: post #110
duncan_bayne wrote: post #87

Earlier quoted context omitted.

But all this standardises is the interop between the browser and the non-user-modifiable client component, the CDM.

Any standard makes it less messy and gives them more excuses to continue pushing it instead of admitting that it should be dropped. It's absurd to promote standards for unethical practices.

Yes. Perhaps I did a poor job of explaining things in my previous post. I was just trying to say that EME being standardised won't actually help standardise CDMs.

Re: Requirements for DRM in HTML are confidential

#222

Post by vidarh »

gsnedders wrote: post #46
belluchan wrote: post #35

Can't we just fork the w3? Start using Firefox and forget about these people. Oh I'm sorry your browser is a little slower, but at least it's not Google made.

Fork the W3C? This is pretty much happened with HTML. The W3C membership voted against chartering a group to work on progressive improvements to HTML (v. XHTML2), initially in the form of Web Forms 2.0, and so the WHATWG was born. The big problem is copyright on all the specs is owned by the W3C. Oh, you want to spec CSS? Well, then you have to do it from scratch. Yes, HTML is now at a point where it is better specif…

You don't need to re-specify anything from scratch. Copyright does not prevent you from referencing the existing documents.

Re: Requirements for DRM in HTML are confidential

#223

Post by mcv »

duncan_bayne wrote: post #171
mcot2 wrote: post #138

Earlier quoted context omitted.

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.

What is the purpose of a standards based approach, if one cannot implement the standard? That is the reality that EME + CDM offers: 'standards' that can only be implemented by the company that owns the proprietary, closed-source CDM blob.

So the only solution is to make the propriety, closed-source CDM blob independent from the browser. Something that can be plugged into any browser. Like Flash or Silverlight. Or maybe something more specialized that just handles the DRM with as little overhead as possible, to make sure it doesn't eat up more CPU than it should.

If it cannot be open, it cannot be part of browsers that are open, which a lot of browsers are.

Re: Requirements for DRM in HTML are confidential

#224

Post by deelowe »

ZenoArrow wrote: post #192
x123 wrote: post #170

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> 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. It's funny how the facts change over time. Just to correct the facts here: the reveal of the PS3 hack occured on January 26, 2010 and then OtherOS support was removed on April 1, 2010 citing security concerns as the rationale. And to t…

You've misunderstood the facts. The PS3 security was not fully compromised with the first hack, and locking down the console was a motivation to those who ended up cracking the security properly (news released December 2010). Watch this... http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=HEFMAP0mTvY#t=0

Doesn't change the fact that Hotz was working on the crack before otheros was removed. So, the removal of otheros was not the seminal moment that the op described. That is, the ps3 did not take so long to crack due to insufficient motivation. It took as long as it did, because it was a more difficult platform. There are similar trends in other areas as well like rooting/jailbreaking phones and installing Linux on UEFI machines.

Re: Requirements for DRM in HTML are confidential

#225

Post by malka »

chc wrote: post #86
betterunix wrote: post #44

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Can you even name any other class of software that cannot work unless people are somehow forbidden to modify or even read the code? It sounds like this is a problem with DRM, not with the free software movement.

As a class, just about any program that depends on security through obscurity has this trait.

There is no 'Security through obscurity'. At best, you will have the illusion of security, wich is worse than no security at all.

Re: Requirements for DRM in HTML are confidential

#226

Post by Fuxy »

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…

Personally as one of those pirates they are trying to stop piracy is only an issue when your content is not easily accessible the legal way or it is too expensive.

I have experienced both. For instance songs are very cheap when your monthly income over £1,500 but when your monthly income is £300 (that's the equivalent in pounds in the country i grew up in) that's a bit too much for just one song.

Same for everything else since they're all price for the US,UK,etc market.

Now that i can afford it i choose to pay for the content i like (it's my way of encouraging the people creating the things i like) even though i could still pirate it.

Then again I'm still forced to pirate some things that can't get legally.

Wish i didn't have to but it's not like their giving me a choice.

Re: Requirements for DRM in HTML are confidential

#227

Post by tesmar2 »

Fuxy wrote: post #226
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…

Personally as one of those pirates they are trying to stop piracy is only an issue when your content is not easily accessible the legal way or it is too expensive. I have experienced both. For instance songs are very cheap when your monthly income over £1,500 but when your monthly income is £300 (that's the equivalent in pounds in the country i grew up in) that's a bit too much for just one song. Same for everything…

> forced

You keep using that word. I do not think it means what you think it means.

Re: Requirements for DRM in HTML are confidential

#228

Post by staticelf »

Fuxy wrote: post #226
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…

Personally as one of those pirates they are trying to stop piracy is only an issue when your content is not easily accessible the legal way or it is too expensive. I have experienced both. For instance songs are very cheap when your monthly income over £1,500 but when your monthly income is £300 (that's the equivalent in pounds in the country i grew up in) that's a bit too much for just one song. Same for everything…

I totally agree with your statements. The only thing I pirate nowadays are basically movies because there is no easy way to purchase them. I don't really pay for music though as I use mostly Grooveshark/Soundcloud and/or listen to online radio.

And it's fucking ridiculous that you have to a saloon to watch a new movie and pay a ridiculous amount of money per person to watch a single movie.

I pirate all movies I can out of basic principal, they are not getting a dime extra from me since they continue with their harassment.

I am actually very pleased with Steam as it's an excellent service. But if I would want to play a game on let's say Origin I would definately pirate that game if it doesn't exist on Steam.

Re: Requirements for DRM in HTML are confidential

#229

Post by jdjb »

duncan_bayne wrote: post #72
gsnedders wrote: post #65

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I don't think there's any WG which includes all W3C members — most members simply don't care enough to wish to dedicate resources to every WG, not to mention the extra obligations it makes them take on via the patent policy. The situation isn't at all unusual — just a more contentious subject matter!

That's true ... but this is a most fundamental issue. I'd have expected that the companies that have benefited historically from the Open Web would be at least a little concerned. Like Google. Oh, wait.

Google's now got two of their own OS'es (one of which has 85% of the worldwide market on the fastest growing segment of personal computing...) and a leading browser in the desktop space. Whatever caring about an Open Web they had before (when they were at the whims of Microsoft, Apple, other browser makers, etc) is long gone.

Re: Requirements for DRM in HTML are confidential

#230

Post by Svip »

ekianjo wrote: post #147
darklajid wrote: post #143

Earlier quoted context omitted.

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.

Only for games that require Steam. A game bought through Steam does not necessarily require Steam. Europa Universalis III can be run without Steam running. Europa Universalis IV only requires Steam to be run once (and once for every DLC you buy, in order to activate it).

These settings are up to the game developer themselves. You are right about the offline mode, but it does not apply to all games.

Post reply on HN