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

On Wed, Jan 30, 2013 at 2:40 PM, Sam Ruby <rubys@intertwingly.net> wrote:

> Meanwhile, is there any way that you could sketch out the beginnings of
> what could form the foundation for a concrete proposal that would address
> your issue?
>

Here's what I have sketched out so far in my previous messages:
1) Require CDMs used with EME to be registered in a central registry.
2) To be registered, a CDM must be accompanied by
documentation/specification that enables user-agents and content providers
to interoperate with the CDM to the maximum extent possible.

I've been thinking about requirement #2 a bit. Here is a proposed
documentation requirement:
Documentation should describe the complete operation of the CDM, in enough
detail to enable independent implementation in user-agents and to enable
content deployment by content providers, except for some set of secret keys
whose values may be withheld.

I believe HDCP for example already meets this bar --- and is widely
deployed to a critical component of DRM for HD content --- so I think it's
a reasonable requirement for a DRM system that we would bless as part of
the Web platform.

Rob
-- 
Jesus called them together and said, “You know that the rulers of the
Gentiles lord it over them, and their high officials exercise authority
over them. Not so with you. Instead, whoever wants to become great among
you must be your servant, and whoever wants to be first must be your
slave — just
as the Son of Man did not come to be served, but to serve, and to give his
life as a ransom for many.” [Matthew 20:25-28]