- From: Emmanuel Revah <stsil@manurevah.com>
- Date: Fri, 12 Jul 2013 20:00:32 +0200
- To: public-restrictedmedia@w3.org
On 2013/07/12 19:28, Jeff Jaffe wrote: > On 7/12/2013 10:15 AM, Emmanuel Revah wrote: >> On 2013/07/12 00:37, Jeff Jaffe wrote: >> >>> If these systems are also interested in viewing premium content, they >>> also already have proprietary software to view that content. >>> >>> If they are not interested in viewing the premium content, they won't >>> have EME either. >> >> >> The term "premium content" should not be used in this discussion. > > We've already had this discussion extensively on the list and tried > unsuccessfully to find a word we can all agree on. > > The more complete description is that certain content owners invested > a great deal to create certain content and therefore have expressed a > requirement to protect that content. 'Premium' content was an > abbreviation. So the proper way for me to have made my point was by > saying: > > "If these systems are also interested in viewing content whose owners > invested a great deal to create and therefore have a desire to protect > that content, they already have proprietary software to view that > content. > > If they are not interested in viewing content whose owners invested a > great deal to create and therefore have a desire to protect that > content, they won't have EME either." > > I don't think that this more lengthy description changes my dismissal > of the argument that EME is relevant to the Prism program. > > >> I don't believe that the W3C should consider different classes of >> content. >> >> >> > One way to interpret this remark is that W3C should not have accepted > the "content protection" requirement of the Web and TV Interest Group > - which of course has been well debated on this list. With all due respect, you appear to be missing the point. "Premium" is the wrong word (semantics and all that stuff): https://en.wiktionary.org/wiki/premium A set of standards either is or is not, the standards for the Open Web should not be for "premium" stuffs. It is for all content or for no content. Users of the standards can then decide to implement EME or not and they can do so according to their own reasoning. The word you should want to use is "restricted content" or eventually "protected content", but certainly not "premium content". Best regards, -- Emmanuel Revah http://manurevah.com
Received on Friday, 12 July 2013 18:01:10 UTC