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 15:13:27 -0700
Message-ID: <CACQ=j+dyumfJWHzeSF3mosx5p78UYYmw37jMFtTT3-W-3miP1g@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 3:12 PM, Glenn Adams <glenn@skynav.com> wrote:

>
> 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
>

the argument ian is making is akin to saying that use of https is
intentionally denying access to hackers
Received on Friday, 24 February 2012 22:14:14 UTC

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.3.1 : Monday, 29 September 2014 09:39:30 UTC