W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > public-html-admin@w3.org > January 2013

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

From: David Singer <singer@apple.com>
Date: Fri, 25 Jan 2013 23:30:05 +0100
Message-id: <7C94DDDE-6C05-4419-B1EF-87CAB6F4BC70@apple.com>
To: "public-html-admin@w3.org" <public-html-admin@w3.org>

On Jan 25, 2013, at 23:16 , Tab Atkins Jr. <jackalmage@gmail.com> wrote:

> On Fri, Jan 25, 2013 at 2:02 PM, David Singer <singer@apple.com> wrote:
>> On Jan 25, 2013, at 22:27 , "Tab Atkins Jr." <jackalmage@gmail.com> wrote:
>>> It is illegal to circumvent DRM in the US and many other countries.
>> So you're saying that you should be able to break a license agreement with impunity, and do what you like with material that is not yours?
> I believe it is fundamentally and unarguably bad to enshrine into the
> web a form of strong vendor-specificity, particularly when the vendors
> in question have no stake in the health of the open web, and in fact
> gain short-term benefit from the web moving to a less free model.  It
> has been *explicitly admitted* that this specification will prevent
> certain common combinations of browser and OS to play videos using
> this technology.  It is very likely, given the explicitly admitted low
> chance of interoperable DRM standards,

You really don't know much about this field, do you?

> that there will be extended
> incompatibilities between browsers on non-free OSes as well for a long
> time.

I expect the OSes and browsers to implement the interoperable APIs, and interoperate. Whether every user is able to get any key they want is an entirely different question.  Should they?

>> It's not even as if the latest recording of your favorite musician is a necessity of life, either.  If *you* don't like the terms they set on your ability to listen to their music, don't buy it.  Telling others that they cannot, and they cannot use your favorite medium, is ...
> Please stop trying to impugn my motives, or imply that I am arguing
> from a shallow position of personal desire.  It is beneath you.  I am
> trying to keep the web platform as free and open as possible.  This is
> supposed to be the goal of this organization.

And there is something about the very existence of copyrighted material that you object to, it seems.

> If it wasn't for my long experience watching and participating in
> discussions about DRM and related technologies, I'd find this entire
> discussion, and the fact that smart people are actually defending the
> idea of DRM, absolutely baffling.  

Well, I think it not unreasonable that people who create content should be able to say that they'd like to sell it, not give it away, and that it's their choice what the terms are, not anyone else's.  And yes, they understand that they live with the balance of consequences of the terms.

If you have a viable alternative model, go for it.

David Singer
Multimedia and Software Standards, Apple Inc.
Received on Friday, 25 January 2013 22:30:39 UTC

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.4.0 : Friday, 17 January 2020 19:57:21 UTC