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

Re: 'what is the web' Re: Encrypted Media proposal: Summary of the discussion so far

From: Leif Halvard Silli <xn--mlform-iua@xn--mlform-iua.no>
Date: Tue, 6 Mar 2012 16:15:43 +0100
To: Charles McCathieNevile <chaals@opera.com>
Cc: Mark Watson <watsonm@netflix.com>, Andreas Kuckartz <A.Kuckartz@ping.de>, "Tab Atkins Jr." <jackalmage@gmail.com>, Christian Kaiser <kaiserc@google.com>, "<public-html@w3.org>" <public-html@w3.org>
Message-ID: <20120306161543477199.0dea2dfe@xn--mlform-iua.no>
Charles McCathieNevile, Tue, 06 Mar 2012 13:16:36 +0100:
  ...
> Actually, as one small part of W3C I disagree. There is a lot of work W3C
> does that is relevant to being able to use the Web for things which are
> not on 'the open web'.
  ...
> Early Web content tended to be a shim of HTML linking up a web full 
> of proprietary documents locked in closed systems, both parts being 
> essential to the function. Today's Web experience often includes the 
> reverse - a shim of proprietary content locked in a search engine 
> that links up a massive amount of public data. I suspect everyone 
> agrees that would be stupid to attempt to restrict the Web to work 
> only with search systems that are open and public, and I don't see 
> why it makes sense to try to restrict it in the other direction.

+1
 
> We return you to the discussion of DRM mechanisms...

I'll stay on the non-mechanic part of the topic a bit more ...

As a user, I want it as simple and free as possible. As a very mini 
content producer - in the e-book field - I am uncertain: I would like 
to protect, but it is probably too expensive.

At any rate: The DRM-opposition has more or less directly alluded to 
Apple as an example. E.g. where are Chrome, Opera Mobile, IE or Firefox 
on iOS? I think Apple's monopolization of its own platform in 
combination with 'very tempting/easy to use but not easy to get out of' 
that lock people in there, despite the DRM freedom. But if Apple's 
ability to monopolize/compete nevertheless has had good effects in the 
field of DRM, then is it not, at least in theory, possible that simpler 
DRM could increase competition too? At least for a while?

Take the use case of a cloud-based personal EPUB3 library: EPUB3 is 
HTML5 - including <video> - with some 'book extra' including option to 
use DRM. [EPUB3 supporting TVs, anyone ...?]

DRM *free* EPUB3 files can be uploaded to the Ibis Reader/Bookworm 
service, which allows you to read your own books from any device that 
can browse the Web: your book basically gets presented as Web pages. In 
the hypothetical situation that an e-book could be offered as a Web 
page in a DRM protected way, then my personal e-books library of 
choice, could have offered to store even my DRM protected books.

What Ibis Reader offers for EPUB, is the same kind of service as iTunes 
Match - except that iTunes Match can only be used with equipment that 
Apple decide: DRM free files [audio, music video and EPUB/iBooks] with 
usage lock-in. It is the open Web that allows me to use Ibis Reader to 
circumvent Apple's cloud lock-in. And from a user point of view: If
my chosen e-book library could also served DRM protected files too, 
then it would fit right in. The alternative to DRM seems to be - when 
looking at Apple - not 'normal' Web browsers, but dedicated 'apps'.

If the Encrypted Media proposal makes it simpler to do DRM, then it 
could lead to more DRM - which sounds like a negativ risk. But it could 
also make DRM-media move out of the dedicated boxes and into the Web. 
Not everyone has the power to build up the same mega system that Apple 
has built up, wherein they can dominate, regardless of DRM. [And 
perhaps that is part of why this proposal is promoted?] DRM could allow 
other players to compete as well, without such a system. At least 
that's a possibility.

Just my two cents ...
-- 
Leif Halvard Silli
Received on Tuesday, 6 March 2012 15:16:31 GMT

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.2.0+W3C-0.50 : Wednesday, 9 May 2012 00:17:46 GMT