[Bug 27055] Surfacing license to the user

https://www.w3.org/Bugs/Public/show_bug.cgi?id=27055

--- Comment #11 from Mark Watson <watsonm@netflix.com> ---
(In reply to Sergey Konstantinov from comment #10)
> > The license doesn't tell you that. Please read my comments above.
> 
> > As to practicability, it is not at all obvious how one would distinguish fraud from legitimate cases where the license restrictions differ from the product restrictions. For example, in streaming services it is likely that a new license is granted each time the content is streamed, so then there is no connection between license restrictions and product restrictions.
> 
> > For download cases, one could imagine that a new license is required for each device on which the content is to be played, so then the 'single device' license restriction legitimately differs from the 'multi device' product. Whilst the product may contain a right to view the content in perpetuity, this may still be conditioned on obtaining a new restricted-lifetime license every so often.
> 
> This sounds to me just like "current implementations are badly designed". I
> see no technical problem in developing appropriate license design which
> explicitly tells user that this "session" license applies only to current
> session / device.

I think a design which explicitly required license restrictions to be matched
to product restrictions for the purpose of user interaction would be a very bad
design. It would preclude a number of use-cases that we are very interested in
and generally restrict innovation. These are two very different things,
architecturally, and should not be technically coupled.

The same principle applies if the coupling is 'scoped' (e.g. to a session as
you suggest) and such scoping makes the user presentation aspect much more
confusing.

> That's still very important to consumer, especially when
> we talk about different license terms for different devices. Probably we
> also should think about some kind of two-step licenses - some standardized
> "master" license describing product restrictions and device- and
> keysystem-specific "session" licenses derived from master.

So, this would decouple the two. The you're talking about some kind of standard
rights-expression language. Probably such things exist. This might be more in
the realm of teh Semantic Web work.

But then I don't see the advantage of having a machine-readable version of the
rights, rather than natural language text presented to the user.

-- 
You are receiving this mail because:
You are the QA Contact for the bug.

Received on Thursday, 23 October 2014 15:12:33 UTC