Re: Premium content is content

Sent from my iPhone

On Jul 12, 2013, at 7:42 AM, Karl Dubost <karl@la-grange.net> wrote:

> Emmanuel Revah [2013-07-12T10:15]:
>> The term "premium content" should not be used in this discussion. I don't believe that the W3C should consider different classes of content.
>
> I agree with Emmanuel. EME is not designed for a specific category of content and will not be used (if released) for only one type of content. Plus it loads the issue of EME/CDM with a specific cultural semantics. We should be thinking about what EME and associated CDM create for the exchange of information and the impact it has on our society and usage of the Web.

Jeff's point was independent of what you call the content in question.
Whatever you call it, working on content protection in W3C will not
change the class of content that is protected or the methods used
(except perhaps to constrain them, as I explained in another mail).

So, what _do_ you think working on content protection in W3C will
"create for the exchange of information and the impact it has on our
society and usage of the Web." compared to not working on content
protection in W3C ?

...Mark
>
> --
> Karl Dubost
> http://www.la-grange.net/karl/
>
>

Received on Friday, 12 July 2013 16:10:21 UTC