W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > public-html@w3.org > February 2012

Re: Encrypted Media proposal (was RE: ISSUE-179: av_param - Chairs Solicit Alternate Proposals or Counter-Proposals)

From: Glenn Adams <glenn@skynav.com>
Date: Fri, 24 Feb 2012 15:12:06 -0700
Message-ID: <CACQ=j+dmyToeCfVbYV-f1SCOpf5CZ0ct8=FDeop79En9JFkOrQ@mail.gmail.com>
To: "Tab Atkins Jr." <jackalmage@gmail.com>
Cc: Ian Hickson <ian@hixie.ch>, John Foliot <john@foliot.ca>, HTML WG <public-html@w3.org>
On Fri, Feb 24, 2012 at 2:46 PM, Tab Atkins Jr. <jackalmage@gmail.com>wrote:

> On Fri, Feb 24, 2012 at 1:36 PM, Glenn Adams <glenn@skynav.com> wrote:
> > On Fri, Feb 24, 2012 at 1:29 PM, Ian Hickson <ian@hixie.ch> wrote:
> >> It is unethical for us to make and use technologies that are
> intentionally
> >> inaccessible, whether that be preventing deaf users from knowing what is
> >> being said in a movie production of Hamlet, or preventing English
> >> professors from critiquing parts of that same movie.
> >
> > Baloney.
>
> Which part is baloney?  The part where deaf people get to enjoy
> Hamlet, or the part where English professors get to critique it?


the part where DRM/content protection is equated with intentionally denying
access to impaired users
Received on Friday, 24 February 2012 22:12:53 GMT

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.2.0+W3C-0.50 : Wednesday, 9 May 2012 00:17:45 GMT