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

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

From: Glenn Adams <glenn@skynav.com>
Date: Mon, 5 Mar 2012 17:20:43 -0700
Message-ID: <CACQ=j+f1X=DAndrGLfp=TRMD=jOa1v2E=A5-cons=Btf_cc8ZA@mail.gmail.com>
To: Kornel Lesiński <kornel@geekhood.net>
Cc: public-html@w3.org
2012/3/5 Kornel Lesiński <kornel@geekhood.net>

> On Mon, 05 Mar 2012 21:29:12 -0000, Glenn Adams <glenn@skynav.com> wrote:
>  oh? where? I represent a commercial video distributor (Cox), and Cox is
>> certainly interested in open-source/clearkey CDMs, but as I have
>> repeatedly stated, this is not a decision open to video distributors.. you
>> are simply barking up the wrong tree
> I've meant it interested in a sense that it's going to be a solution you
> actually plan to use.
> From what you're saying I take that you're not allowed to use ClearKey,
> and therefore ease of implementation and interoperability of ClearKey
> solution has no relevance to availability of content you distribute.

no, that's not what I said; I said that content owners dictate what DRM/CP
must be used by Cox; Cox could suggest they try something different or
complain or could refuse to license content under their terms, but it
ultimately comes down to what *they* (the content owners) choose and
whether Cox wishes to intentionally handicap its business or not;

it may be in the future that content owners will migrate to ClearKey, but
right now that isn't what they use;

the current proposal supporting multiple CDMs is consistent with Cox
requirements, which are that no single CDM solution be mandated, and that
CDM choices can change over time
Received on Tuesday, 6 March 2012 00:21:31 UTC

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