W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > public-html-admin@w3.org > February 2013

Re: EME and proprietary plug-ins

From: Andreas Kuckartz <A.Kuckartz@ping.de>
Date: 13 Feb 2013 21:23:21 +0100
Message-ID: <511BF639.4040706@ping.de>
To: "Glenn Adams" <glenn@skynav.com>
Cc: "Tab Atkins Jr." <jackalmage@gmail.com>, "Henri Sivonen" <hsivonen@iki.fi>, "Chris Wilson" <cwilso@google.com>, "Robin Berjon" <robin@w3.org>, "Sam Ruby" <rubys@intertwingly.net>, "Fred Andrews" <fredandw@live.com>, "public-html-admin@w3.org" <public-html-admin@w3.org>
Glenn Adams:
>>> The issue of OS playing field is a non-issue.

It is not just an issue, it is one of the *main* issues.

>> Several people disagree.  I'm not sure why you think it's a non-issue,
>> or why you think it's *such* a non-issue that it can be dismissed
>> out-of-hand like that.  Producing technologies that will only be
>> usable on particular OSes is a bad thing.
> 
> There is nothing about EME that prevents it from being implemented on any
> OS. Whether a given CDM is supported on an OS/UA combination or natively in
> a OS is a deployment decision outside of the scope of the EME
> specification. There is nothing in principle that prevents any CDM from
> functioning on an OS. That's why this is a non-issue.

The "principle" of DRM (closedness) is incompatible with Open Source
(openness). EME is useless without CDMs implementing DRM. Therefore
either EME is incompatible with Open Source or EME is useless.

Cheers,
Andreas
Received on Wednesday, 13 February 2013 21:50:38 GMT

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.2.0+W3C-0.50 : Wednesday, 13 February 2013 21:50:39 GMT