Re: I strongly urge all supporters to reconsider the EME proposal. It is not in your best interests!

Are concerns taken seriously on the other mailing list, or is it a spot to send people to voice their concerns with other likeminded people?

On May 15, 2013, at 11:12 AM, Paul Cotton <Paul.Cotton@microsoft.com> wrote:

> Please take this discussion to a more appropriate forum such as http://www.w3.org/community/restrictedmedia/
>  
> /paulc
> HTML WG co-chair
>  
> Paul Cotton, Microsoft Canada
> 17 Eleanor Drive, Ottawa, Ontario K2E 6A3
> Tel: (425) 705-9596 Fax: (425) 936-7329
>  
> From: piranna@gmail.com [mailto:piranna@gmail.com] 
> Sent: Wednesday, May 15, 2013 10:44 AM
> To: Zak Fenton
> Cc: public-html-media@w3.org
> Subject: Re: I strongly urge all supporters to reconsider the EME proposal. It is not in your best interests!
>  
> +1, you've exposed very clearly your arguments and I totally agree with them.
> 
> El 15/05/2013 16:37, "Zak Fenton" <zak.fenton@gmail.com> escribió:
> DRM simply does not belong on the web, it is contrary to freedom of speech and it is of zero benefit to the consumers who fuel the web economy. It will only make browsers and servers more complicated and more error prone, restrict the ability of people to use the web, and waste CPU cycles encrypting what is probably already widely available to pirates.. As any technologically competent person is aware, unless you can stream the media direct to the viewer's brain,  there will ALWAYS be ways to circumvent these methods: A paying subscriber to a channel or buyer of a movie can simply record their screen and audio output (without any quality loss if they're smart), freely sharing the result with others.
> You cannot beat piracy with technology. Suffice to say pirates have access to better technology, because they get it free! The only thing that will slow the continual increase in piracy is better content, content which is actually worth paying for, and better content developers, content developers who people actually want to pay.
> This proposal will not help anybody, it will only make web standards more complicated, harder to correctly implement, and less reliable as a result. I'm really beginning to lose my faith in standards bodies like this to develop standards which are actually of benefit to humanity, rather than standards which have been set by investors desperately trying to squeeze profit from a 20th century business model. This simply does not make any sense.
> Older generations developed the technology, but it was my generation that made the internet and the web a popular success. Without the freedoms we had, future generations will simply move towards underground protocols and networks that protect their freedom, creating a new safe haven for real criminals. If this proposal is accepted and widely implemented, it will perhaps mark the beginning of the end for the relevance of web standards, but certainly not for freedom online.
> 
> Again, I strongly urge all involved parties to reconsider their support for this proposal.
> Yours sincerely,
> Zak Fenton.