Re: Formal Objection to Working Group Decision to publish Encrypted Media Extensions specification as a First Public Working Draft (FPWD)

Maybe it would be a good idea to read two articles published today on
Barrapunto (spanish version of Slashdot) regarding why Spain is one of the
highest countries on piracy. Short answer, there are no real "legal"
alternatives, and the ones that there're there, they are dificult to use,
without quality and content and fairly expensive, sometimes several times
more expensive than going to a store a get a phisical copy that you own
instead of a DRM-based streaming based license that you loose if you decide
to sign out of their platform. In that situation where corporates give us
more problems that solutions (and wasting time on EME and DRM instead
finding and offering them), fairly better, easier and respectful for the
user rights to use BitTorrent...

http://ciberderechos.barrapunto.com/ciberderechos/13/05/30/1321239.shtml
http://ciberderechos.barrapunto.com/ciberderechos/13/05/30/1311233.shtml

(sorry, links are in spanish... :-( Maybe you can use a web translator)
El 31/05/2013 00:07, "Florian Bösch" <pyalot@gmail.com> escribió:

On Thu, May 30, 2013 at 11:27 PM, John Foliot <john@foliot.ca> wrote:

> Outside of the technical falsehood being expressed here (one of the goals
> EME is seeking is to remove the need for plugins), the EFF continues to
> couple EME with DRM, despite the W3C expressly stating the contrary:
>
> "W3C is not developing a new DRM system, nor are we embracing DRM as an
> organization." - http://www.w3.org/QA/2013/03/drm_and_the_open_web.html

EME doesn't have any use in itself. It is one half of the DRM, the other
half of which is CDMs.


This is NOT about the W3C "endorsing DRM", despite what the EFF propaganda
> might want you to believe; it is about where this technical effort is going
> to happen (because it WILL happen), and how much oversight and input
> average
> netizens can provide.
>
It comes down to 2 choices: work on it in the open at the W3C, or have the
> work continue elsewhere or behind closed doors where we have no (or less)
> input on the outcome. There is no third option.

The work on CDMs is already behind closed doors. It won't be disclosed. It
isn't of any use to anybody who isn't in the "club". You don't have any use
of EME, since you already have the vendors and the content distributors in
your pocket. That's all you ever need. It's not a question IF the work is
being used to seggregate platforms and work is being conducted behind
closed doors, inside walled gardens and to the detriment of diversity and
open and equal access. The only question is why you would need EME to do
it.