- From: Mark Watson <watsonm@netflix.com>
- Date: Sun, 2 Jun 2013 12:09:59 -0700
- To: Gervase Markham <gerv@mozilla.org>
- Cc: "public-restrictedmedia@w3.org" <public-restrictedmedia@w3.org>
Sent from my iPhone On May 31, 2013, at 8:48 AM, Gervase Markham <gerv@mozilla.org> wrote: > On 31/05/13 15:55, Mark Watson wrote: >> Examples include Geolocation and WebGL. Whilst it is possible to >> implement both of these in open source software, you basically need >> proprietary hardware (and the proprietary software drivers to go with >> it) to offer a performant capability to applications (GPS and a graphics >> card, respectively). > > I'm not sure this is the case; I believe that it's true that there are > GPS chips and graphics cards out there with open source drivers, > including for accelerated 3D. If you believe these examples hold, can > you say exactly which part of the GPS or 3D stacks is entirely > unavailable as open source software for any existing hardware? I mean the hardware itself and the software/firmware that runs on it. > > I think that perhaps the criteria for a set of technologies to be open > is that it is possible, given enough time, skill and intelligence, for a > person or group of people to read the documentation and legally > implement those technologies without needing anyone else's permission, > to a level where they had the same capabilities as other existing systems. So, that would exclude anything where the patent landscape was such that any performant implementation would require non-RF licenses, for example wireless Internet technology ? > > So let's take WebGL. Even if there were no free 3D drivers for any > existing graphics hardware, someone, given enough time and effort, could > write some. (And people are.) Or they could build their own hardware. > (And people are.) These actions are not legally restricted or made > crytographically impossible. > > However, if EME/CDM comes to exist and is robust, and is used for web > video, then no amount of time or effort alone will allow coders to > legally implement the system such that it plays the same videos. They > need a contract with (i.e. permission from) an appropriate DRM provider > (or more than one). What would be your opinion if the DRM capabilities were included in hardware, such as a graphics card, and a driver could be implemented as open source without permissions / licenses ? Just trying to understand where you draw the line. ...Mark > > Gerv
Received on Sunday, 2 June 2013 19:10:32 UTC