Re: Encrypted Media proposal (was RE: ISSUE-179: av_param - Chairs Solicit Alternate Proposals or Counter-Proposals)

On Fri, Feb 24, 2012 at 2:20 PM, Glenn Adams <> wrote:
> On Fri, Feb 24, 2012 at 3:17 PM, John C. Vernaleo <>
> wrote:
>>> Which part is baloney?  The part where deaf people get to enjoy
>>> Hamlet, or the part where English professors get to critique it?
>>> the part where DRM/content protection is equated with intentionally
>>> denying access to impaired users
>>> the argument ian is making is akin to saying that use of https is
>>> intentionally denying access to hackers
>> Other than disagreeing with your use of the word hacker, isn't that
>> exactly why most people use https?
> sorry, wrong analogy on my part, i should have said denying access to
> impaired users;
> the point is that DRM/CP has nothing to do with content access with respect
> to impaired users

Hixie's analogy was that inaccessible tools are to disabled users as
DRM is to legal-but-unlicensed users.


Received on Friday, 24 February 2012 22:48:16 UTC