W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > public-html-media@w3.org > April 2017

Re: Response from Director to formal objection "Turn off EME by default and activate only with express permission from user"

From: David Singer <singer@apple.com>
Date: Wed, 12 Apr 2017 11:31:07 -0700
Cc: Mark Watson <watsonm@netflix.com>, "public-html-media@w3.org" <public-html-media@w3.org>
Message-id: <44368D6A-558D-46E9-A6D0-82210625A9B7@apple.com>
To: Harry Halpin <hhalpin@ibiblio.org>, Paul Cotton <Paul.Cotton@microsoft.com>

> On Apr 12, 2017, at 11:21 , Harry Halpin <hhalpin@ibiblio.org> wrote:
> 
> 
> 
> On Wed, Apr 12, 2017 at 7:10 AM, David Singer <singer@apple.com> wrote:
> 
> > On Apr 12, 2017, at 10:50 , Harry Halpin <hhalpin@ibiblio.org> wrote:
> >
> > Again, please actually stay on topic.
> >
> > There is *obviously* a profit motive in DRM. Otherwise, it would not exist. There is also an obvious collusion
> 
> Google, please define collusion:
> 
> col·lu·sion
> kəˈlo͞oZHən/
> noun
>         • secret or illegal cooperation or conspiracy, especially in order to cheat or deceive others.
> 
> Wild accusations of this kind are unacceptable. This conversation is at an end.
> 
> 
> I think that again you are going off topic to avoid the topic at hand. 

You made an accusation against members of *illegal activity*, which you have neither withdrawn nor apologized for. In fact, below, you dig in deeper. Perhaps you could stay on *that* topic long enough to withdraw the accusation and apologize? Otherwise, as I say, this conversation is at an end.

> 
> I did not imply secret, although it should be mentioned as true that for some browser vendors there is are multiple parts of the company that owns different components of the platform, where one is a browser and the other is a media-streaming service. That's not a wild conspiracy theory, it's the reality of how these company works and is self-evident even to end consumers. That's why browser vendors are not neutral in this case, and other cases as well. 
> 
> I do think the collusion in this case can be considered unfair, or possibly cheating users out of rights. You may not agree with me, but I think the European Commission will have something to say on possible anti-trust issues within three months, as is legally binding. 
> 
> https://juliareda.eu/2017/04/open-letter-to-the-european-commission-on-encrypted-media-extensions/
> 
> Earlier, the European Commission has considered bundling of OS, browser, and other services as in violation of anti-trust rules. Adding DRM puts European copyright twist on it, given European exceptions and limitations to copyright are not harmonized. 
> 
> https://www.nytimes.com/2016/04/21/technology/google-europe-antitrust.htm
> 
>   cheers,
>       harry

David Singer
Manager, Software Standards, Apple Inc.
Received on Wednesday, 12 April 2017 18:31:43 UTC

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.4.0 : Friday, 17 January 2020 15:49:19 UTC