W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > public-html@w3.org > March 2012

Re: W3C FAQ on DRM and HTML5 ?!

From: Andreas Kuckartz <A.Kuckartz@ping.de>
Date: 5 Mar 2012 21:29:04 +0100
Message-ID: <4F552210.2060206@ping.de>
To: "Philippe Le Hegaret" <plh@w3.org>
Cc: "HTML WG (public-html@w3.org)" <public-html@w3.org>
On 04.03.2012 19:33, Philippe Le Hegaret wrote:
> It does need some refresh indeed but let's be clear:
> W3C has many participants interested in finding a solution
> around media content protection. So, we are definitively
> interested in the space, independently of whether the
> HTML Working Group is interested in developing a solution
> or whether it is done in a separate group. Whatever we
> choose, we will do our best to get the right balance
> between producers and consumers.

I will not try to summarize or repeat the arguments made on the mailing
list so far. But I would like to mention two issues which in my opinion
are fundamental.

The first answer on the FAQ page correctly stresses that HTML5 is
intended to be "the future Open Web Platform".

So all solutions need to be "open" and "balanced". But neither seems to
be possible with DRM.

The producers do not trust the consumers, but at the same time they
demand that the consumers trust them, because they do not allow the
consumers to inspect the source code of the DRM software. In fact the
producers even got lawmakers to make it illegal in some jurisdictions to
reverse engineer DRM software. And one of the three initial companies
who are supporting the Encrypted Media proposal at the same time is
explicitely promoting "silent monitoring" of users in the context of
DRM. After the experience for example with the DRM rootkit malware which
was distributed by a once respectable company named Sony there certainly
is *no* reason why consumers should trust the producers. A balanced
outcome therefore must at least enable the consumers to inspect the
complete source code of the DRM software which is to be run on their
hardware. It does not seem likely that they would allow this.

The current Encrypted Media proposal first of all is intended to be used
to enable something which is *closed* in all meanings of the word.
According to the discussion so far not even the publication of
specifications of the main CPMs can be expected let alone Open Source
implementations. Supporting such a proposal would be a watershed moment
for the W3C and a significant turn away from the future Open Web Platform.

Received on Monday, 5 March 2012 20:29:29 UTC

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.4.0 : Saturday, 9 October 2021 18:45:49 UTC