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

RE: Encrypted Media proposal

From: John Foliot <john@foliot.ca>
Date: Sat, 3 Mar 2012 10:46:16 -0800
To: "'Ian Hickson'" <ian@hixie.ch>, "'Mark Watson'" <watsonm@netflix.com>
Cc: <public-html@w3.org>
Message-ID: <004001ccf96d$ec7cb8d0$c5762a70$@ca>
Ian Hickson wrote:
> 
> On Sat, 3 Mar 2012, Mark Watson wrote:
> >
> > Again, authors have the right to license their works however they
> choose
> > (within the law). Software authors and movie authors alike. You may
> not
> > agree with all their choices but I hope you support their right to
> make
> > those choices.
> 
> I support people's rights to make whatever choices they want *up to the
> point where it infringes on other people's rights*.

What right or rights, exactly, are being infringed upon? Certainly not their
right to choose to enter or not enter into a contractual agreement with a
content owner. You might not agree on the terms and conditions of that
agreement, which is *your* right, but you are not a legal party to the
contract being entered into by the content owner and the potential content
consumer. Your paternally condescending insistence to insert yourself in the
middle of this transaction infringes upon the right of the vendor and the
consumer to make an informed, mutually beneficial contractual exchange.


> Which is what DRM
> does. So no, I certainly do not support their right to make the choice
> to
> use DRM: it's unethical.

These potential consumers have specific rights with regard to the law of
false and deceptive advertising, unfair trade practices and illegal
marketing (as does the vendor). If any of those rights are infringed upon,
the consumer has a right to seek redress using the current legal system. 

What is unethical is you attempting to impose upon me, or any other possible
client of Netflix's service, that I must enter into a contractual agreement
with that company *under your conditions*. By what authority do you or the
W3C have the right to impose what could be considered restrictive trade
conditions? *You* think that it's unethical and immoral? 

Unbelievable.

JF
Received on Saturday, 3 March 2012 18:46:55 UTC

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