Re: Alternatives to DRM?

On 4/12/2013 11:03 AM, Dominique Hazael-Massieux wrote:
> I have argued that the fundamental incompatibility of deployed DRM
> systems with open source implementations make DRM-enabling systems
> incompatible with W3C standardization.
>
> Mark (and others) have indicated that enabling a DRM API would open the
> space for an open source-compatible DRM solution; it might be the case,
> but that sounds like sufficiently exploratory to be done outside of
> standardization (e.g. in a community group); demonstrating that this
> incompatibility (that I believe fundamental) doesn't exist in practice
> seem a pretty important prior step to standardization in this space.

DReaM [1] appears to indicate feasibility.  Whether a feasible solution 
is sufficiently practical for implementation (and sufficiently addresses 
the requirements of premium content use cases) arguably should be 
discussed in a Working Group.

[1] http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Project_DReaM

>
> If interoperable DRM is not an option, and if we assume that the stance
> of premium content (video content [*]?) creators on DRM is not something
> that will change in the short term, the question becomes if there is any
> middle ground solution that would provide sufficient guarantees to these
> content creators while allowing the kind of openness and innovation that
> open source offers.
>
> I'm sure this must have been debated to death in other fora — is anyone
> in position to summarize what alternative approaches (à la watermarking)
> exist, and why they haven't been deemed satisfying for content creators?
>
> Dom
>
> [*] as far as can tell, DRM is gone from music, and people have
> published photos on the Web without DRM "for ever"; not mentioning
> texts. So maybe we should only focus on the specific needs of premium
> video content, which arguably comes with a much higher price tag?
>
>
>

Received on Friday, 12 April 2013 15:30:04 UTC