- From: Kornel Lesiński <kornel@geekhood.net>
- Date: Tue, 22 Jan 2013 20:32:26 -0000
- To: public-html-admin@w3.org
On Tue, 22 Jan 2013 18:03:25 -0000, Paul Cotton <Paul.Cotton@microsoft.com> wrote: > This is a Call for Consensus (CfC) to publish as a First Public Working > Draft (FPWD) the following Encrypted Media Extensions document: > > https://dvcs.w3.org/hg/html-media/raw-file/tip/encrypted-media/encrypted-media-fpwd.html I oppose publication of this draft. The spec can enable effective protection of commercial media only when it's used in conjunction with deliberately underspecified, non-interoperable user-hostile CDMs. The Clear Key scheme is a red herring, as it doesn't provide substantial protection over existing capabilities of HTTPS and HTTP authentication. I acknowledge that there is a strong demand from the media industry for a DRM "standard" and legitimization of DRM as part of the web, but I think that publishing a spec that is a DRM Trojan horse goes against W3C's principles of creating interoperable, royalty-free web stack and would tarnish W3C's name. As far as I know the only useful application of this spec by software stack without closed/non-RF components is reading of media from CDNs by trusted users without disclosing contents of the media to the CDN. However, this particular use-case could be satisfied in a less convoluted and more generic way (e.g. http+aes[1] or enc[2] schemes). [1] http://html5.org/tools/web-apps-tracker?from=7011&to=7012 [2] http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-html/2012Jun/0094.html -- regards, Kornel Lesiński
Received on Tuesday, 22 January 2013 20:32:58 UTC