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

On Mon, Mar 5, 2012 at 9:42 AM, Glenn Adams <glenn@skynav.com> wrote:
> On Mon, Mar 5, 2012 at 9:56 AM, Tab Atkins Jr. <jackalmage@gmail.com> wrote:
>> As argued multiple times, it would be a disservice to the web platform
>> as a whole to bake closed-source royalty-encumbered technology into
>> HTML.
>
> And who is proposing doing this? Nobody. Nobody is proposing requiring a
> specific encumbered CDM just as nobody is proposing a specific encumbered
> A/V codec. Please stop making claims that are patently untrue.

Sigh.  It's not untrue.  As Mark Watson has admitted, the CDMs that
Netflix *actually expects to be able to use* are closed-source and/or
royalty-encumbered.  I expect other video distributors to be similar.

Unless you have evidence that a sufficiently large marketshare of
video distributors are actually planning to use an open-source
royalty-free CDM like ClearKey, we must treat the CDM section of the
spec as being poisonous.

~TJ