- From: Henri Sivonen <hsivonen@iki.fi>
- Date: Wed, 24 Apr 2013 15:27:29 +0300
- To: Jeff Jaffe <jeff@w3.org>
- Cc: Dominique Hazael-Massieux <dom@w3.org>, public-restrictedmedia@w3.org
On Wed, Apr 24, 2013 at 2:33 PM, Jeff Jaffe <jeff@w3.org> wrote: > Dom, in framing this as a question about open source compatible DRM was > anchoring the discussion on a long-established W3C practice to make sure > that our standards are implementable in open source. I was merely pointing > out that this would be possible with DReaM. This still interprets "open source" as "disclosed source" instead of the freedoms associated with Open Source which happen to require source disclosure. > To your point, W3C could certainly add a new practice to make sure that our > standards are compatible with the "no 'disclosed source code except keys'" > category. In that case DReaM like solutions would indeed be excluded. I thought it was already effectively a requirement that W3C specs be implementable in ways that grant the downstream freedoms associated with Open Source (and that this was one of the reasons why the boundaries of the EME spec have been drawn to exclude the actual production CDMs). It would be news to me if the current policy merely required W3C specs to be compatible with source disclosure. After all, the RF Patent Policy is relevant to downstream freedoms but orthogonal to source disclosure. -- Henri Sivonen hsivonen@iki.fi http://hsivonen.iki.fi/
Received on Wednesday, 24 April 2013 12:27:59 UTC