RE: how does EME/DRM effect captioning

At Comcast we already send unprotected caption data to web browsers and native mobile applications.

For our Silverlight player, we have been sending clear SAMI files to accompany the PlayReady protected Smooth Streaming video. On mobile platforms we have been sending WebVTT files in the clear.

I have never seen contractual language from the content owners that states the captions must be encrypted.

Your intuition on this matter is correct, at least from where I sit.

Dave Mays

________________________________________
From: hsivonen@gmail.com [hsivonen@gmail.com] on behalf of Henri Sivonen
[hsivonen@iki.fi]
Sent: Tuesday, April 02, 2013 5:29 AM
To: Silvia Pfeiffer
Cc: Glenn Adams; Steve Faulkner; HTMLWG WG; HTML Accessibility Task Force
Subject: Re: how does EME/DRM effect captioning

On Tue, Apr 2, 2013 at 12:10 PM, Silvia Pfeiffer
<silviapfeiffer1@gmail.com> wrote:
> I'd actually be curious about this as well, because I've heard people
state
> that captions are just as valuable and as much "content" as the video
> itself, in their own right. So, I'm curious to hear whether people expect
to
> send their captions also in encrypted form when they distribute encrypted
> content or whether they're happy to provide them in the clear through a
> <track> element.

Well, people state all sorts of things. See font DRM claims before and
after Web fonts happened (without DRM).

The question is:
If DRM in browsers is available for video and audio but not for
captions and regulations require captions if audio is provided, will
movie streaming services refuse to stream movies to browser because
they couldn't apply DRM to the captions? Seems highly implausible that
the answer would be "yes".

In the Silverlight-based Netflix player, do the captions go through
PlayReady or not? If not, there's really no issue here.

--
Henri Sivonen
hsivonen@iki.fi
http://hsivonen.iki.fi/

Received on Tuesday, 2 April 2013 12:19:35 UTC