RE: Oppose DRM ! Re: CfC: to publish Encrypted Media Extensions specification as a First Public Working Draft (FPWD) from Mays, David on 2013-01-22 (public-html-admin@w3.org from January 2013)

From: Mays, David <David_Mays@Comcast.com>
Date: Tue, 22 Jan 2013 21:55:10 +0000
To: "john@netpurgatory.com" <john@netpurgatory.com>
CC: "Kotay, Sree" <Sree_Kotay@cable.comcast.com>, "ifette@google.com" <ifette@google.com>, Mathias Bynens <mathias@qiwi.be>, Andreas Kuckartz <a.kuckartz@ping.de>, "public-html-admin@w3.org" <public-html-admin@w3.org>
Message-ID: <6dyeyqb6o5x3ix5fjnflg4ix.1358891684796@email.android.com>

Encrypted media delivery has uses other than DRM.

One obvious one I can think of is for secure private video communications. Think of a doctor transmitting a video diagnosis to a patient, and it's easy to imagine a case for encrypted video that has nothing to do with DRM.

An argument that its only purpose is to support DRM is uncreative at best, disingenuous at worst.

Ian is right; don't blow off your hand to deal with a thorn in your finger.

Dave

(This is my personal opinion, not that of my employer.)


"John C. Vernaleo" <john@netpurgatory.com> wrote:

Received on Tuesday, 22 January 2013 21:55:43 UTC