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 12:23:24 -0700
Cc: Paul Cotton <Paul.Cotton@microsoft.com>, Mark Watson <watsonm@netflix.com>, "public-html-media@w3.org" <public-html-media@w3.org>
Message-id: <79CA65CC-FBF5-4AE9-A403-20397750E4B3@apple.com>
To: Harry Halpin <hhalpin@ibiblio.org>

> On Apr 12, 2017, at 11:55 , Harry Halpin <hhalpin@ibiblio.org> wrote:
> > I said, contra Mark's agrument that browser vendors are neutral, that there is collusion
> OK, earlier you accused me of not reading.  The *definition* of the word you used — collusion — is that it is secret or illegal activity intended to cheat or deceive, and I gave you verbatim one such definition above. Did you read it?
> David - I don't have at hand the precise dictionaries you do.

I assure you that the word you used is always pejorative. For example “is collusion pejorative?” typed into Google yields, as the first hit, The Columbia Guide to American Standard English, which says (again, verbatim):

"collude, collusion: these words are always pejorative; they involve cooperation for dishonest, illegal, unethical,, or immoral purposes. To collude is “to connive”."

> Yes, because above. You are throwing around accusations based on a dictionary definition you find convenient to avoid the objection.

Now you are being insulting again. Please stop.

> Do you think browser implementers are always neutral? 

I have very little idea what you mean by neutral here. If we get back to the discussion, you could explain. I do not believe that there is any collusion going on in the industry.

> I would prefer a reasonable argument to emotional demands for apologies and intentional misreading of words,

I would also prefer a reasoned argument over wild accusations; I rather hoped you would apologize and we would move on.

> and I do not apologize nor retract the rather self-evident statement that the various parts of components, which include browsers, work in ways that can indeed be collusion (see EC ruling on Google link earlier) and can but are of course not necessarily illegal. 

And so you dig in deeper.

David Singer
Manager, Software Standards, Apple Inc.
Received on Wednesday, 12 April 2017 19:23:58 UTC

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