- From: Nikos Roussos <comzeradd@mozilla-community.org>
- Date: Sat, 06 Jul 2013 12:48:50 +0300
- To: public-restrictedmedia@w3.org
On Fri, 2013-07-05 at 20:19 -0700, Duncan Bayne wrote: > > This is the unvarnished truth, > > and failing to accept that is (it appears to me) the source of much of > > your frustration. > > Not in my case. I'm 100% understanding of the fact that work on DRM > (and probably EME as it's actually a good design) will go on outside the > W3C. In my case, the value comes from the neener, neener, boop part: by > refusing to work on DRM, the W3C will uphold its mission and principles. > > As I've said before, those who want DRM can go and build it. A > DRM-specific industry consortium might be a reasonable starting point. Exactly. That's why finding better alternatives is not a valid argument. The debate here is not about DRM being bad or good. The debate is whether this should be a W3C standard or not.
Received on Saturday, 6 July 2013 09:49:13 UTC