W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > public-html-media@w3.org > April 2013

Re: Chromebook DRM specification

From: Mark Watson <watsonm@netflix.com>
Date: Tue, 16 Apr 2013 08:40:26 -0700
Message-ID: <CAEnTvdBgW36DnzaL=S-7O5yf_462SVH4bKHSTpw9E9iWHt5FKw@mail.gmail.com>
To: Florian Bösch <pyalot@gmail.com>
Cc: Paul Cotton <Paul.Cotton@microsoft.com>, "Mays, David" <David_Mays@comcast.com>, David Dorwin <ddorwin@google.com>, "<public-html-media@w3.org>" <public-html-media@w3.org>, "Philippe Le Hegaret (plh@w3.org)" <plh@w3.org>, "Michael(tm) Smith (mike@w3.org)" <mike@w3.org>
On Tue, Apr 16, 2013 at 8:28 AM, Florian Bösch <pyalot@gmail.com> wrote:

> It is necessary to implement Widevine if one wants to deliver content
> DRMed to Chromebooks.
>

The server side yes, but the server side is not the subject of this
specification. It's necessary to implement a Silverlight compiler to
deliver content to Silverlight, or an H.264 encoded to deliver content to a
device that only supports H.264, but these things do not mean that <object>
or <video> are not in scope of the HTML charter.


> If any other DRM is available on chromebooks, that would be independently
> implementable, please feel free to point me to a specification.
>

How is the current capabilities of a single device relevant to the status
of the specification ?


>
> I do disagree that the HTML-DRM as is practised, is in the spirit of the
> HTML-WG charter. Theories of its functioning may differ, the reality does
> not. HTML-DRM in its entirety cannot be independently implemented by me at
> this time, because no unencumbered specification for a necessary component
> to use it has been produced. I have asked for this specification, to no
> avail.
>

You are more than welcome to propose a DRM solution that is available
Royalty-Free. Indeed, such a thing would be very welcome. I don't know of
one. If I did I would certainly propose it.

You can certainly implement EME in a fully RF Open Source way - it just
might not meet the requirements of all content providers. Similarly, you
can implement WebGL fully in software, but it won't meet the requirements
of all content - for that you need proprietary hardware (for performance).


>
> That leaves me with no other conclusion that a refusal to provide the
> specification in practise means the HTML-WGs charter is no longer observed.
>
>
> On Tue, Apr 16, 2013 at 5:00 PM, Mark Watson <watsonm@netflix.com> wrote:
>
>> Just for the record (because, Florian, I believe you know this), it is
>> not necessary to implement Widevine in order to implement the EME
>> specification (any more than it is necessary to implement Silverlight in
>> order to implement the <object> element in HTML or H.264 in order to
>> implement <video>).
>>
>> We can discuss the interoperability implications of this approach (and
>> indeed we are), but the approach itself has clear precedent in the web
>> platform.
>>
>> ...Mark
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>> On Tue, Apr 16, 2013 at 7:08 AM, Florian Bösch <pyalot@gmail.com> wrote:
>>
>>> It is noted that The HTML-WG co chair has stated that for a
>>> specification published by the HTML-WG there is no path for implementation
>>> neither for content authors nor for consumers of the content that complies
>>> with the principles of the HTML-WG of providing unencombered access to the
>>> technologies. Thank you for the clarification that the HTML-WG has given up
>>> on its charter.
>>>
>>>
>>> On Tue, Apr 16, 2013 at 3:28 PM, Paul Cotton <Paul.Cotton@microsoft.com>wrote:
>>>
>>>>  As HTML WG co-chair I want to reinforce the point that asking for
>>>> product specification documentation on a W3C email list is not
>>>> appropriate.   ****
>>>>
>>>> ** **
>>>>
>>>> You have told this before, so please desist in making this kind of
>>>> request.****
>>>>
>>>> ** **
>>>>
>>>> /paulc****
>>>>
>>>> ** **
>>>>
>>>> Paul Cotton, Microsoft Canada****
>>>>
>>>> 17 Eleanor Drive, Ottawa, Ontario K2E 6A3****
>>>>
>>>> Tel: (425) 705-9596 Fax: (425) 936-7329****
>>>>
>>>> ** **
>>>>
>>>> *From:* Mays, David [mailto:David_Mays@Comcast.com]
>>>> *Sent:* Tuesday, April 16, 2013 9:03 AM
>>>> *To:* Florian Bösch; David Dorwin; <public-html-media@w3.org>
>>>> *Cc:* Paul Cotton
>>>>
>>>> *Subject:* Re: Chromebook DRM specification****
>>>>
>>>>  ** **
>>>>
>>>> This is not an appropriate venue for this request.****
>>>>
>>>> ** **
>>>>
>>>> If you want Widevine documentation, I suggest you reach out to Widevine
>>>> directly, as David Dorwin already told you, the day after you asked your
>>>> question.****
>>>>
>>>> ** **
>>>>
>>>> The W3C does not have Widevine documentation.****
>>>>
>>>> ** **
>>>>
>>>> David Mays | sr. software architect | 15.217 | one comcast center |
>>>> philadelphia, pa. 19103 | 215.286.3395 w | 267.307.4195 m****
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> _____________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________
>>>> ****
>>>>
>>>> ** **
>>>>
>>>> *From: *Florian Bösch <pyalot@gmail.com>
>>>> *Date: *Tuesday, April 16, 2013 1:01 AM
>>>> *To: *David Dorwin <ddorwin@google.com>, "<public-html-media@w3.org>" <
>>>> public-html-media@w3.org>
>>>> *Cc: *Paul Cotton <Paul.Cotton@microsoft.com>
>>>> *Subject: *Re: Chromebook DRM specification
>>>> *Resent-From: *<public-html-media@w3.org>
>>>> *Resent-Date: *Tuesday, April 16, 2013 1:01 AM****
>>>>
>>>> ** **
>>>>
>>>> It has now been a month since my request for documentation/software on
>>>> how to encode video for chromebooks compatible with chromebooks DRM. None
>>>> has been produced.****
>>>>
>>>> ** **
>>>>
>>>> On Tue, Mar 19, 2013 at 7:11 PM, Florian Bösch <pyalot@gmail.com>
>>>> wrote:****
>>>>
>>>> Widevines proprietary DRM solution is suggested to achieve DRMed video
>>>> hosting. Widevine is not offering libraries/documentation to the public to
>>>> use. This will not keep most people from using flash/silverlight to
>>>> implement their own solution. I do not see any improvement by this over the
>>>> status quo. EME proponents are still without an answer and a resolution to
>>>> this simple question: How do I encode and host DRMed content. ****
>>>>
>>>> ** **
>>>>
>>>> This issue is not addressed.****
>>>>
>>>> ** **
>>>>
>>>> On Tue, Mar 19, 2013 at 6:42 PM, David Dorwin <ddorwin@google.com>
>>>> wrote:****
>>>>
>>>> I addressed this issue in
>>>> https://www.w3.org/Bugs/Public/show_bug.cgi?id=20967#c11, which you
>>>> replied to. Container and encryption details can be found at
>>>> https://dvcs.w3.org/hg/html-media/raw-file/tip/encrypted-media/encrypted-media.html#containers,
>>>> and there are no special hosting requirements. You can try it out with the
>>>> Clear Key ("webkit-org.w3.clearkey"), which is available on Chrome and
>>>> Chrome OS. If you are interested in providing licenses to the Widevine CDM,
>>>> I suggest contacting Widevine: http://www.widevine.com/contact.html.***
>>>> *
>>>>
>>>> ** **
>>>>
>>>> On Mon, Mar 18, 2013 at 11:52 AM, Florian Bösch <pyalot@gmail.com>
>>>> wrote:****
>>>>
>>>> As a reminder, no answer has been provided how I could encode and host
>>>> DRMed video for the Netflix/Google Chromebook DRM since a week now.****
>>>>
>>>> ** **
>>>>
>>>> On Tue, Mar 12, 2013 at 7:15 PM, Paul Cotton <Paul.Cotton@microsoft.com>
>>>> wrote:****
>>>>
>>>> I expect that David can answer your questions about Google’s
>>>> implementation.****
>>>>
>>>>  ****
>>>>
>>>> Paul Cotton, Microsoft Canada****
>>>>
>>>> 17 Eleanor Drive, Ottawa, Ontario K2E 6A3****
>>>>
>>>> Tel: (425) 705-9596 Fax: (425) 936-7329****
>>>>
>>>>  ****
>>>>
>>>> *From:* Florian Bösch [mailto:pyalot@gmail.com]
>>>> *Sent:* Monday, March 11, 2013 7:44 PM
>>>> *To:* <public-html-media@w3.org>
>>>> *Subject:* Chromebook DRM specification****
>>>>
>>>>  ****
>>>>
>>>> Apparently Google Chromebook now supports "HTML DRM" and Netflix has
>>>> started serving content that way (source:
>>>> http://news.slashdot.org/story/13/03/11/2155219/netflix-using-html5-video-for-arm-chromebook
>>>> )****
>>>>
>>>>  ****
>>>>
>>>> Could anybody point out the specification and required libraries that'd
>>>> allow me (or anybody) to encode/host their videos compatible with
>>>> chromebooks html DRM implementation?****
>>>>
>>>> ** **
>>>>
>>>> ** **
>>>>
>>>> ** **
>>>>
>>>> ** **
>>>>
>>>
>>>
>>
>
Received on Tuesday, 16 April 2013 15:40:55 UTC

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.4.0 : Friday, 17 January 2020 15:48:35 UTC