- From: Ruben Rodriguez via GitHub <sysbot+gh@w3.org>
- Date: Tue, 16 Aug 2016 15:04:06 +0000
- To: public-html-media@w3.org
rubenquidam has just created a new issue for https://github.com/w3c/encrypted-media: == Formal objection to Encrypted Media Extensions advancing to Proposed Recommendation == {Sending to the public-html-mail list, copying it here for visibility} My name is Ruben Rodriguez and I'm a free software developer and distributor. As a GNU developer I maintain the GNU IceCat browser[1], a freedom and privacy focused fork of Mozilla Firefox. As the director of the Trisquel[2] GNU/Linux free software distribution I publish copies of the "GNU IceCat" and "Abrowser" Firefox derivatives. Both those programs have their DRM capabilities disabled. I formally object to Encrypted Media Extensions (EME)[3] being incuded as part of the HTML family of standards. My reason is that implementing and distributing DRM encumbered software exposes free software projects, distributors and users to legal risk, due to the wide limitations the DMCA imposes on studying, modifying and distributing software that implements DRM. Security and privacy problems have also been pointed out by others including Harry Halpin[4] and Wendy Seltzer[5]. These threats exist regardless of whether the software is under a free license or not, but they are amplified for free software projects: * If the DRM components of an otherwise freely licensed browser are distributed under a proprietary licensing scheme, then the browser is no longer actually free software, and cannot be distributed by projects that only distribute such. * If to circumvent that -as Mozilla Firefox currently does- the non-free components are downloaded separately by the browser itself, then we have a backdoor that -even if we ignore the important security implications- robs the user of their control of their computation. It also exposes them to legal risk, as they are now in possesion of DRM encumbered software they didn't request and are forbidden to audit. * The worse case is when the DRM components are licensed under a free software license -as would be possible with clearkey or other implementations- and thus included in the browser itself. The distribution of said browser under a free license would give users a false impression that it was safe to study, modify and redistribute the code. In reality, doing so would expose them to DMCA threats. Given those alternatives, the conclusion is that DRM encumbered software cannot be distributed by free software developers without putting both the distributors and the recipients of the software at a high legal risk. DRM goes against the principles of free software, and against the World Wide Web as an open platform. Respectfully, Ruben Rodriguez. [1]: https://www.gnu.org/software/icecat/ [2]: https://trisquel.info [3]: https://w3c.github.io/encrypted-media/ [4]: https://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-html-media/2016Aug/0001.html [5]: https://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-html-media/2016Aug/0007.html Please view or discuss this issue at https://github.com/w3c/encrypted-media/issues/305 using your GitHub account
Received on Tuesday, 16 August 2016 15:04:13 UTC