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

291–300 of 424 posts

Re: Requirements for DRM in HTML are confidential

#291

Post by Fuxy »

jscheel wrote: post #244
Fuxy wrote: post #226

Earlier quoted context omitted.

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…

You are NEVER forced to steal things that aren't essential to survival. Starving on the street and steal a loaf a bread, that's one thing. Don't want to participate in many varied ways of listen to music for free legally and so choosing to steal the next big album you want to hear, not ok, ever.

Ok. I agree forced may be a bit of a strong word since i can always choose not to pirate it.

However what about books or scientific papers which are hidden behind pay walls or just incredibly expensive.

The price of a good programming book is about £20. But when your monthly income is £300 that is a lot of money. Not to mention you have to pay electricity, gas, etc. and the prices for the utilities are not that much different.

So your options are:

1. buy the book and not eat for 2 weeks

2. pirate it

3. don't do anything and let your progress as a programmer be hindered by the lack of knowledge

That's what i call being forced. There's no situation where i can say i helped the author with the little i have and progressed in my development as a programmer.

If you give in to the system they set up knowledge become the privilege of the wealthy I agree that content creators need to live but the one size fits all approach is really f*ed up.

Open it up let people pay as much as they want or set different prices for different regions piracy will fall considerably if you do and for god sake don't limit peoples access to content by regions it's a sure way to increase piracy.

Re: Requirements for DRM in HTML are confidential

#292

Post by yarrel »

rimantas wrote: post #233
duncan_bayne wrote: post #92

Earlier quoted context omitted.

http://www.w3.org/standards/ W3C standards define an Open Web Platform for application development that has the unprecedented potential to enable developers to build rich interactive experiences, powered by vast data stores, that are available on any device. http://www.w3.org/Consortium/mission.html The social value of the Web is that it enables human communication, commerce, and opportunities to share knowledge. One…

Now tell me, how adding DRM disables all the open web bits.

Now tell me how the landmine in the field prevents grazing everywhere in it.

Re: Requirements for DRM in HTML are confidential

#293

Post by yarrel »

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…

> DRM only works if you don't know how it works.

Which is why it doesn't work.

But it is very useful for excluding competitors and pissing off consumers.

Re: Requirements for DRM in HTML are confidential

#294

Post by shawnz »

Already__Taken wrote: post #183
shawnz wrote: post #108

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> Others have documented an interest in extending it to other media types. Sorry, I guess "strictly" was the wrong word. Rather, it is designed particularly for the streaming video use case. > We don't know, as long as the requirements are secret. True. But I think a pretty good idea can be had just by looking at the current state of the industry. > It'll happen regardless of the W3C. Exactly. Having the W3C head the…

Do you want to buy and run windows 9? Because to see the new series of the game of thrones only windows 9's CDMs can read it. That is the kind web you are negotiating for. How long do you think MS would back port these things to win7 before they bump their minimumContentPlayer=win8 and then that's it you're not seeing any of that media to you pay up. Perhaps they'll choose to offer a binary for other open source OSs,…

> That is the kind web you are negotiating for.

As discussed, that is a motivation that will exist regardless of the W3C's course of action. What I am negotiating for is the W3C being in charge of what access these "big bad companies" have over web standards, rather than allowing the development of similar technologies to continue unmoderated.

Re: Requirements for DRM in HTML are confidential

#295

Post by angersock »

k-mcgrady wrote: post #252
wernercd wrote: post #242

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Depends... He could live somewhere that he can't get access to legal copies of TV shows he wants to watch (Some TV shows take months, if ever, to show up locally). Or live somewhere like Australia where everything costs prohibitively more than elsewhere. If I want a TV show - Say House of Cards - and it's not available, or it's available much later than elsewhere, or it's prohibitively more pricey... They want the sh…

>> "They want the show and the only reasonable way to get it... then it will "force" people who want it to Piracy." I would very much like a Ferrari California. It's unlikely I will ever be able to afford one - it is prohibitively expensive for me. I am not being forced to steal it. I understand like a rational human being should that if I can't afford something or it isn't available to me and it isn't essential to m…

First, the show is being given away for free elsewhere--it is mere accident of geography that the person can't access it.

Second, stealing implies that the person being stolen from can't access it anymore--which is clearly not the case here.

Stealing is the wrong framework to use here.

Re: Requirements for DRM in HTML are confidential

#296

Post by fafner »

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…

And GOG refuses to add GNU/Linux support. Considering that many GOG games run in DOSEmu anyway and some come with native Linux support this is not really understandable.

Re: Requirements for DRM in HTML are confidential

#297

Post by fafner »

lucian1900 wrote: post #204
masklinn wrote: post #164

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> * For games, Steam makes it easy to avoid SecuROM Hell Steam has its own DRM, and games distributed via steam may have additional third-party DRMs (including SecuROM and other similar shite). IIRC GOG is only DRM-free games, although it is less convenient.

GoG is actually quite convenient, it has a much better website and a good downloader. The only downside is the much smaller library than Steam.

And no GNU/Linux support...

Re: Requirements for DRM in HTML are confidential

#298

Post by fafner »

lucian1900 wrote: post #203
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…

Sadly, both Steam and Netflix still include DRM, it's just a bit less annoying.

Netflix along with Google and Microsoft are the companies behind the HTML5 DRM proposal.

Re: Requirements for DRM in HTML are confidential

#299

Post by gbhn »

Rizz wrote: post #130
gbhn wrote: post #109

Earlier quoted context omitted.

How about the embed tag? What big differences do you see between implementing EME vs the embed tag?

One difference is that with embed you can still support most existing platforms by implementing NSAPI.

My reading is that ESE is intended to work in much the same way -- the main work is done by the Content Decryption Module, which is more plugin-like. And indeed, the way existing DRM-using systems work in the browser is with the embed tag.

The spec says "The Content Decryption Module (CDM) is a generic term for a part of or add-on to the user agent that provides functionality for one or more Key Systems."

Re: Requirements for DRM in HTML are confidential

#300

Post by fafner »

bitwize wrote: post #163
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…

Let me tell you how things work in the real world. When the people with money say "we want this", you don't argue. It doesn't matter if it's technically infeasible. It doesn't matter if it won't have the intended effect. When the people with money want something, YOU GIVE IT TO THEM. And let them deal with the consequences. Otherwise, you won't get the business, and life can otherwise be made very, very difficult for…

> So the Web either gets DRM, or Hollywood makes content available on proprietary platforms that provide it.

DRM in the Web will be a proprietary platform! The EME proposal is a proposal to make the former open Web depend on proprietary platforms. The actual DRM is not specified (how could it be?) and it only proposes an API the browser should provide for the proprietary binary blob DRM.

This is a really horrible step and an attack on the open Web! I'd much rather have Netflix and Hollywood use a completely proprietary DRM platform for their streaming services than them ruining the Web.

Post reply on HN