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

Can This Web Be Saved? Mozilla Accepts DRM, and We All Lose

eff.org

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

141–150 of 374 posts

Re: Can This Web Be Saved? Mozilla Accepts DRM, and We All Lose

#141

Post by rayiner »

brownbat wrote: post #120
rayiner wrote: post #39

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I feel like this is a rationalization. The fact that a market is free doesn't mean that producers can't sell on the terms they want. There is DRM-free content, just not the content you want. Content creators choose to use DRM because very few users object to it, and I bet with modern DRM most don't even know it exists. That's a perfectly functional free market. Its like saying that there isn't a functional free marke…

> The fact that a market is free... We're talking about a government-created monopoly though. If there is competition over distribution, rather than content, better delivery mechanisms eventually win. We had this when FM displaced AM radio. There was a compulsory licensing regime, which means that anyone can distribute any content they want for a reasonable fixed fee. FM was a better distribution technology, so it wo…

All property rights are government created monopolies. Imagine applying compulsory licensing to other things. They government forces you to sell your widgets at a "reasonable fixed fee." Imagine the government forcing Google or Facebook to share their databases to potential competitors for a "reasonable fixed fee."

Compulsory licensing was a tactic used to shift profits from content creators to middlemen.

Re: Can This Web Be Saved? Mozilla Accepts DRM, and We All Lose

#142

Post by wyager »

snird wrote: post #43
wyager wrote: post #26

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> The decision of whether or not to use DRM should be of the site creators. That's as "free" as it gets. Why does that mean that we should facilitate their use of DRM? If they want to use it, they can specify a third-party plugin.

Because it's a need of the market, using third-party plugin is no harder, maybe even easier to implement. So it's not an overhead for the site implementing it. But rather it's an overhead for the user. you'll have to install a third-party plugin on your computer. Making it to your job now to make sure this plugin is not security vulnerable, that it is updated etc' etc'. And, it's probably closed. the web is open.

> And, it's probably closed. the web is open.

Do you understand that these new HTML DRM plugins will be closed as well?

Re: Can This Web Be Saved? Mozilla Accepts DRM, and We All Lose

#143

Post by klodolph »

marcosdumay wrote: post #113
klodolph wrote: post #78

Earlier quoted context omitted.

So what you do is you use the DRM API to negotiate a way to transfer a decryption key to a secure hardware module in the consumer's device. Having the source code to the Firefox component doesn't give you access to the firmware or keys stored in the module. (Yes, you can hack hardware. But it's way more expensive.)

It's still your computer... Capture the firmware when loading, and decompile it. The problem starts only when "they" decide to mandate in our hardware. (And yep, "they" are already doing it, for several values of "they". We are fighting the wrong war here.)

That won't work, you'll need to try harder.

I have some insider knowledge of how these chips work. First, you get the chips with crypto keys already installed, so having a copy of the firmware source code won't help. Second, the keys are unique to the device, so getting it won't give you much. Third, the firmware is authenticated so modifying the firmware won't help. Fourth, the chip is designed to be resistant to physical attack.

Re: Can This Web Be Saved? Mozilla Accepts DRM, and We All Lose

#144

Post by res0nat0r »

brownbat wrote: post #120
rayiner wrote: post #39

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I feel like this is a rationalization. The fact that a market is free doesn't mean that producers can't sell on the terms they want. There is DRM-free content, just not the content you want. Content creators choose to use DRM because very few users object to it, and I bet with modern DRM most don't even know it exists. That's a perfectly functional free market. Its like saying that there isn't a functional free marke…

> The fact that a market is free... We're talking about a government-created monopoly though. If there is competition over distribution, rather than content, better delivery mechanisms eventually win. We had this when FM displaced AM radio. There was a compulsory licensing regime, which means that anyone can distribute any content they want for a reasonable fixed fee. FM was a better distribution technology, so it wo…

Huh? Since when have Hollywood movie studios been government created monopolies?

Re: Can This Web Be Saved? Mozilla Accepts DRM, and We All Lose

#145

Post by jgon »

GuiA wrote: post #45
howeyc wrote: post #32

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Right, they are using "their power to influence the development of the open web" by supporting DRM. What's the point in having this power if you immediately cave?

Ding ding ding! You've hit the nail on the head. Mozilla has no real power over the web. Google, Microsoft, and Apple have the power (look at the names associated with EME DRM - what a surprise). Mozilla has an illusion of power, which is tolerated by the other actors because it makes everyone happy. But no one should mistake it for real leverage.

Exactly, Mozilla had power right up until the tech community sold out the future of the web in favor of sparkly things given to us by our benevolent corporate masters. Every time we installed Chrome for our parents because it was so minimal, every time we fired up safari because zomg the user interface was "lickable", we were working towards this point. We gave Google and Apple this power because we decided that smooth animations and per process tabs were a fair trade for the future of a global information network not controlled by corporate interests. Mozilla could have had real leverage if the tech community wasn't populated by a fashion driven divas with just enough foresight to see the tip of their own nose, but that isn't the world we live in.

Re: Can This Web Be Saved? Mozilla Accepts DRM, and We All Lose

#146

Post by MichaelGG »

kator wrote: post #133

DRM is a fantasy that uninformed media executives cling onto with a dream that it will put the genie back in the bottle. It's sad to see this stuff but totally understandable considering the divide between the technology people who understand the reality and the people in charge of dreaming of a fantasy that gets them back to the '80s.. Yes I know.. I was an executive as a major record label, trust me it's hard to be…

It really is that simple, though. Arrested Development was ripped from Netflix immediately after availability. There's nothing complicated about showing that it does not work.

There would be zero impact if Netflix didn't have DRM. People would still have to search and install third party software to download streams. At that point, it doesn't matter if it comes from Netflix or from some random torrent.

Re: Can This Web Be Saved? Mozilla Accepts DRM, and We All Lose

#147

Post by azakai »

shmerl wrote: post #41
jgraham wrote: post #30

Earlier quoted context omitted.

That isn't the case. You can choose to not install the CDM component.

Is there a way to disable all related code in Firefox itself? Just for the sake of it. May be Mozilla can produce clean and tainted builds for that purpose.

The code is 100% open source, so even if there isn't a GUI option for it, it would be easy for people to make builds without it. There are already many forked builds of firefox like iceweasel, etc.

Re: Can This Web Be Saved? Mozilla Accepts DRM, and We All Lose

#148

Post by wyager »

dublinben wrote: post #66
wyager wrote: post #20

Earlier quoted context omitted.

It would be worse because HTML is supposed to be a hypertext standard, not a DRM standard. We shouldn't be putting closed things in "open" standards.

There is nothing closed being put into the standard.

How do you think this DRM will work?

Re: Can This Web Be Saved? Mozilla Accepts DRM, and We All Lose

#149

Post by wyager »

rbanffy wrote: post #130
barrkel wrote: post #77

Earlier quoted context omitted.

It is the wrong choice. It's the same BS I remember reading on slides from graphics card vendors excusing some other way of selling the user down the river. Content can adapt to reach their customers. Bend here and the web itself is under threat. Mozilla needs a social contract like Debian, since it seems clear they can't rely on leadership for backbone.

> It is the wrong choice. WHat would the web gain if Mozilla lost most of its user base? Could we trust Apple, Microsoft and Google to have a moral backbone?

So you're saying that keeping their userbase and losing their principles is better than losing their userbase and keeping their principles? Why do we care if users go to Apple/Google/etc. if Mozilla is no better than those companies anyway?

Re: Can This Web Be Saved? Mozilla Accepts DRM, and We All Lose

#150

Post by shmerl »

azakai wrote: post #147
shmerl wrote: post #41

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Is there a way to disable all related code in Firefox itself? Just for the sake of it. May be Mozilla can produce clean and tainted builds for that purpose.

The code is 100% open source, so even if there isn't a GUI option for it, it would be easy for people to make builds without it. There are already many forked builds of firefox like iceweasel, etc.

Yes, I expect such thing to surface, but it would be nice if Mozilla could provide such options on their own too. That would be some small positive gesture towards those who don't appreciate their move and see it as a betrayal of Mozilla's core values. It would as well make this issue more apparent. Doesn't Mozilla care about educating the public on such matters? It surely would be a positive thing for the Open Web.
Post reply on HN