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

While I hate DRM as much as the next person, one has to ask what the
alternatives are. It's all well and good for us to sit high on our morals
and say "DRM bad!" but the reality is that the web is competing with other
ecosystems (Native apps like iTunes, plugins like Silverlight and Flash)
where DRM is available. By saying "No DRM in HTML5" it's not clear to me
that we're not blowing off our own own hand in an effort to deal with a
thorn in our finger. I think what this does is simply give people one more
reason to say "The web is inadequate, we need to stick with our native apps
or plugins".

My personal opinion only.
-Ian

On Tue, Jan 22, 2013 at 12:29 PM, Mathias Bynens <mathias@qiwi.be> wrote:

> On 22 Jan 2013, at 19:17, "Andreas Kuckartz" <A.Kuckartz@ping.de> wrote:
>
> > -1
> >
> > As discussed here some time ago the only purpose of this specification
> > is to enable DRM, which is Defective by Design
> > http://www.defectivebydesign.org/
>
> Agreed. DRM is against the spirit of the Open Web.
>
>