Re: HTML5 and DRM - A Middle Path?

On 2013/08/15 18:34, David Wood wrote:
> Hi all,
[...]
> I personally like the Netflix service and use it regularly.  I do not
> expect that Netflix could continue to operate that useful service if I
> were able to store and replay any movie on my local disks and share
> them with others without paying the artists or service providers (as I
> could and would if DRM didn't exist).


Every show that you can view on Netflix you can get via other means, 
usually not legal. The availability of the content has not stopped 
Netflix from becoming what it is today. People are willing to pay for 
the service that Netflix and such companies provide, which is easy 
access to content. You don't need to worry about storing stuff either 
and you can access it all when away from home and from almost any 
device, etc etc.

I'm sorry to hear that it is only DRM that is stopping you from breaking 
your agreement with Netflix. I guess for most subscribers, it's not DRM 
that stops them from "pirating".



> - Would the Web be irreparably damaged by giving *some* flexibility to
> those operations already being performed on the Web in proprietary
> ways?


It's not flexibility we are talking about, anyone can publish on the web 
using DRM today. What DRM proponents realised is that they cannot count 
on non-free software to be sustainable. Supporting DRM within the W3C is 
a way to solve that, it would put control of the supported platforms in 
the hands of the CDMs instead of that being in the hands of a company 
like Adobe or Microsoft.



> - Does DRM for some content types infer DRM for all content types?


No, but if (within the scope of W3C) it's possible for some content than 
it should be possible for all content types. Why would it be okay to DRM 
streaming but not for other content types (text, image, etc etc) ?



> If we really wanted to get carried away, we could stipulate that any
> organization wishing to use DRM for a pre-approved content type needed
> to register with a central authority, as is currently done with the
> IETF for content types.


Central authority is exactly what we don't need.



>  It would be cool, though, if others
> were to propose other ways of meeting in the middle.


I think your intentions are sincere and all but what does the middle 
look like ? The top half only to be DRM'd ? Or maybe "optional DRM", a 
bit like with Okular (search Okular and DRM) ?


My opinion (and possible middle ground) is that this whole DRM thing 
should be simply done outside of the W3C. These companies want to work 
together on an open specification for DRM, just do it. But don't spoil 
the W3C label, that would be nice. Kthx.


-- 
Emmanuel Revah
http://manurevah.com

Received on Friday, 16 August 2013 18:04:25 UTC