Re: Oppose DRM ! Re: CfC: to publish Encrypted Media Extensions specification as a First Public Working Draft (FPWD)

On Wed, Jan 30, 2013 at 10:09 AM, Timothy B. Terriberry <
tterriberry@mozilla.com> wrote:

> Andreas Kuckartz wrote:
>
>> Ian Fette (イアンフェッティ):
>>
>>> Also, why do people insist that drm is incompatible with foss? Yes,
>>> today's
>>>
>>
>> I consider it impossible to do that while keeping the software open
>> until the opposite is proven.
>>
>
> So Sun Microsystems designed such a system a few years back:
> http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/**Project_DReaM<http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Project_DReaM>
>
> I never looked into the technical details, and the project was killed
> after the Oracle acquisition, but there's a proof point of something at
> least _claiming_ to provide DRM without security-through-obscurity. I agree
> with Roc's sentiments expressed elsewhere in this thread: an unbounded set
> of black boxes will not produce interoperability between and among both UAs
> and content providers. The reasons for objecting to proceeding to FPWD are
> that the authors have not even tried, nor shown any intention of trying, to
> document those black boxes, and this seems unlikely to change.
>


If we could recover the source code for this and make it work as DRM system
that EME could rely on, maybe this could resolve some of the issues around
EME.

I tried getting to anything that is still available freely about DReaM, but
everything has been taken offline. The only place I found anything is in
the Web Archive. I found this architectural overview:
http://web.archive.org/web/20090516173937/http://www.openmediacommons.org/collateral/DReaM-Overview.pdf

There are more documents at:
http://web.archive.org/web/20090516173937/http://www.openmediacommons.org/documentation.html

But the source code from dev.java.net was only available behind a login, so
I don't think the Web Archive ever got it.

Might this help someone to come up with a way to specify the "black boxes"
that Tim talks about?

Cheers,
Silvia.