- From: Gervase Markham <gerv@mozilla.org>
- Date: Thu, 06 Jun 2013 15:21:52 +0100
- To: Mark Watson <watsonm@netflix.com>, Hugo Roy <hugo@fsfe.org>
- CC: Karl Dubost <karl@la-grange.net>, "public-restrictedmedia@w3.org" <public-restrictedmedia@w3.org>
On 06/06/13 14:56, Mark Watson wrote: > Again, nothing is 'imposed' on anyone. Everyone is completely free to > accept proprietary DRM components or not. Please explain why you think > something is being 'imposed', who is doing that and how ? I have no > idea how someone would go about imposing proprietary software on > anyone. Giving an example from another context: "You must fill in this online form to get a passport. The form only works in IE." Now, you could say that you can always not get a passport. But that's a fairly big thing to be required to give up in order to retain control of your computing environment. The difference between watching a movie and getting a passport is, in a sense, the entire heart of the philosophical argument. On one side, a movie is an entertainment product that you can choose to consume or not, entirely of your own volition, depending on whether you are willing to agree to the conditions imposed by the owner. On another side, a movie is a piece of the culture which we all share and, while few think it should be legal and possible to freely copy and distribute it at whim, many think it should be legal and possible to excerpt, quote, and/or remix into more culture - something EME/CDM does not permit, as a direct consequence of the software implementing it being under the control of someone other than the owner of the viewing computer. Gerv
Received on Thursday, 6 June 2013 14:22:24 UTC